■liilil 


rmyrTfm  f  m  m  r5f  .tfrr?  trf . 


liiiiiiiiiiiiipiw 


'wmm 


i  iiiiiiiiilll  I 


ii  ™^ 
;  :^ :;iiiiiir 


1 


iii 


iilii^B 


W 


li 

iiil 


iliillii* 


lilijiiiiliiiiii' 

iiiilllll 


ilii 


illliniiir, 


ill^ 


m 


lllH^^^^^^^ 


Hi 


lilii! 


ij  lillilpi 
Iiil 


flii  HiPiii 

5     y  ;u hii'.iniHii:: 


jiiiiliiilliil 

itei'i    ; .„. .„.: 

PilPPl  f  i!ll  iil!lli!iii|!'p|ii!ji'^'        :  i  liiiiiiiiiil I  P>i 


Division     BtV\503 
Section    ^   5.  K(^S   ' 


INTRODUCTION 

TO 

THE     TALMUD 


INTRODUCTION 

TO 

THE    TALMUD 


Historical  and  Literary  Introduction 

Legal   Hermeneutics  of   the   Talmud 

Talmudical  Terminology  and  Methodology 

Outlines  of  Talmudical   Ethics 


appendix 

Key  to  the  Abbreviations  Used  in  the  Talmud  and  its  Commentaries 

./  -By 

M.  MIELZINER,  Ph.D.,  D.D. 

Professor  of  Talmud  at  the  Hebrew  Union  College 


SECOND  REVISED  EDITION 


FUNK    &   WAGNALLS    COMPANY 

NEW  YORK  AND  LONDON 
1903 


Copyright,  1902,  by 

M.  MiElyZINER 

[Printed  in  the  United  States  0/  America] 

Published  December,  1902 


Inscribed  io  the 
Blessed  Memory 

OP  MY 

Beloved  Brother 
EPHRAIM   MIELZINER 

I,ATB  OF  THOX.If ,  GEKlCAirr 


Preface  to  the  First  Edition. 


The  Talmud  is  undoubtedly  one  of  the  most  remarkable 
literary  productions  of  antiquity.  In  its  twelve  folio  volumes 
it  embodies  the  mental  labors  of  the  ancient  Jewish  teachers 
during  a  period  of  about  eight  hundred  years.  The  attention 
of  these  teachers  was  directed  particularly  to  expounding 
and  developing  the  religious,  moral  and  civil  law  of  the  Bible. 
The  pages  of  this  great  work  are,  besides,  replete  with 
wise  observations,  ethical  maxims,  beautiful  legends  and 
parables,  and  exegetical  explanations.  We  also  find  in  it 
valuable  historical  and  ethnographical  material,  as  well  as 
occasional  references  to  the  various  branches  of  ancient  know- 
ledge and  science. 

The  Talmud  is  also  remarkable  for  the  powerful  influence 
it  exerted  upon  the  thought  and  life  of  the  Jews  during  the 
Middle  Ages,  yes,  even  down  to  quite  recent  times.  Its 
authority  was  second  only  to  that  of  the  Bible.  Although 
modern  Jews  have  emancipated  themselves  more  or  less 
from  its  authority,  the  Talmud  still  remains  a  venerable 
literary  monument  of  a  great  and  important  epoch  in  the 
development  of  Judaism.  At  the  same  time,  it  is  a  valuable 
source  of  religious  and  ethical  doctrines  as  well  as  of  scientific 
investigation. 

In  our  day,  quite  a  general  interest  in  this  literary  monu- 
ment of  antiquity  is  being  awakened.  This  increasing  inter- 
est is  manifested  not  only  by  the  publication  of  numerous 
works  and  ivonographs  on  Talmudical  topics,  but  also  by  the 


Prefacb. 

fact  that  several  universities  and  colleges  abroad  and  in  thi8 
country  have  established  chairs  for  the  study  of  this  special 
branch  of  literature. 

The  present  work  which  I  have  called  ''Introduction  to  the 
Talmud"  is  the  result  of  many  years'  labor  and  of  a  long  experi- 
ence as  professor  of  the  Talmudical  branches  at  the  Hebrew 
Union  College.  It  is  intended  to  facilitate  the  exceedingly 
difficult  study  of  an  intricate  subject.  It  is  the  first  comprehen- 
sive work  of  its  kind  in  the  English  language,  yes,  it  might  be 
said,  in  any  modern  language,  if  we  except  Prof.  Herman  lu 
Strack's  ' 'Binleitung  in  den  Talmud",  a  book  which,  though 
treating  our  subject  with  scientific  exactness  and  impartiality, 
was  not  intended  to  cover  the  whole  ground  as  is  attempted  in 
the  present  publication. 

Earlier  works  of  this  kind,  from  the  eleventh  century  down 
to  our  time,  have  been  written  in  Hebrew  or  rather  in  the  Rab- 
binical idiom,  and  hence  are  accessible  to  Rabbinical  scholars 
only.  Valuable  literary  material,  the  result  of  keen  critical 
research  into  our  subject,  has  been  published  by  some  modern 
scholars,  among  whom  may  be  named  the  late  Z.  Frankel,  and 
I.  H.  Weiss.'  The  results  reached  by  these  scholars  have 
been  duly  considered  in  our  ''Historical  and  Literary  Intro- 
duction". 

Regarding  the  second  and  third  parts  of  this  work, 
I  had  to  rely  almost  entirely  on  my  own  researches.  The 
only  modern  work  on  Talmudical  Hermeneutics  is  Dr.  H.  S. 
Hirschfeld's  "Halachische  Exegese".  But  the  usefulness  of  this 
learned    work     is     greatly    impaired     by     the    fact    that 


»  The  literature  on  this  subject  is  given  further  on  in  the  chapter 
"Auxiliaries  to  the  study  of  the  Talmud"  pp.  83—86. 


Prepack. 

the  author  cast  it  into  a  philosophical  form  to  which  the 
subject-matter  does  not  readily  lend  itself. 

It  has  been  my  endeavor  to  present  the  methods  of  the  Tal- 
mudical  interpretation  of  the  Bible  in  the  proper  light.  The 
application  of  the  various  hermeneutical  rules  is  illustrated  by 
numerous  examples  -which  have  been  carefully  selected,and  which 
will  afford  the  student  an  opportunity  of  becoming  familiar  with 
some  of  the  peculiarities  of  the  Talmudical  Law. 

Part  III  of  this  Introduction  is  the  first  attempt  at  present- 
ing the  Methodology  and  Terminology  of  the  Talmud  in  a 
strictly  systematical  way.  It  is,  to  some  extent,  an  exposition 
of  the  Dialectics  of  the  Rabbis,  an  analysis  of  their  discussions 
and  debates.  The  references  and  examples  added  to  each  of  the 
technical  terms  and  phrases  show  their  prevalence  in  all  sections 
of  the  Talmud.  I  may  be  pardoned  in  entertaining  the  hope  that 
this  portion  of  my  work  will  be  found  a  reliable  guide  through 
the  labyrinth  of  Talmudical  discussions. 

The  appended  treatise  "Outlines  of  Talmudical  Ethics"  is 
essentially  the  contents  of  my  paper  on  that  subject  read  at  the 
World's  Parliament  of  Religions  in  Chicago. 

The  alphabetical  Register  of  the  principal  Tanaim  and  Amo- 
raim,  the  Index  of  technical  Terms  and  Phrases,  and  the  ''Key 
to  the  Abbreviations  used  in  the  Talmud  and  its  commentaries" 
will,  I  hope,  add  to  the  usefulness  ol  this  work. 

Cincinnati,  Mabch,  1894. 

THE  A  UTHOR. 


Preface  to  the  Second  Edition. 


Encouraged  by  the  very  favorable  reception  given  to  the 
first  edition  of  this  Introduction  to  the  Talmud,  I  have  care- 
fully revised  the  work  for  the  present  new  edition.  The 
numerous  typographical  errors  which  had  escaped  the  atten- 
tion of  the  proofreader  of  the  former  edition  have  been  cor- 
rected, and  several  pages  of  new  matter  have  been  appended 
which  supplement  the  Bibliography  of  modern  works  and 
pamphlets  on  Talmudic  Subjects. 

Cincinnati,  O.,  November,  1902. 

THE  AUTHOR. 


TABLK     OK     CONXKNXS. 


P^ART    I, 
HISTORICAL   AND   LITERARY   INTRODUCTION. 

Page. 
THE  TALMUD   AND   ITS   COMPONENT   PARTS.  3 

CHAPTER  I.       THE   MISHNA. 

Its  Origin,  Compilation  and  Division. 
Order  of  Succession,  Names  and  General 
Contents  of  its  63  Tracts.  Language  of 
the  Mishna.  ------  4.I6 

CHAPTER  II.     WORKS    KINDRED    TO    THE    MISHNA. 

Tosephta,  Mechilta,  Siphra,  Siphre;  Frag- 
mentary Baraithoth.  -        -        .        -  17-21 

CHAPTER  III.    THE   AUTHORITIES  OF  THE  MISHNA. 

The  Sopherim,  the  "  Zugoth,"  the  Tanaim. 
The  six  Generations  of  the  latter.  Char- 
acteristics and  Biographical  Sketches  of 
the  principal  Tanaim.  -        -       -        -        22-39 

CHAPTER  IT.    THE    EXPOUNDERS  OF  THE  MISHNA. 

Palestinian  and  Babylonian  Amoraim. 
Their  Division  into  Generations.  Bio- 
graphical Sketches  of  the  principal  Amo- 
raim. -...-..  40-55 

CHAPTER  Y.      THE   GEMARA. 

Classification  of  its  Contents  into  Halacha  .     | 

and  Agada.    Compilation  of  the  Palastinian  \/ 

and  the  Babylonian  Gemara.  The  two 
Gemaras  compared  with  each  other.  -       56-62 

CHAPTER  TI.  APOCRYPHAL  APPENDICES  TO  THE 

TALMUD.    -.--..     63-64 

CHAPTER  YII.  COMMENTARIES  ON  THE  TALMUD. 

A.  On  the  Babylonian  Talmud.  B.  Exclu- 
sively on  the  Mishna.  C.  On  the  Palesti- 
nian Talmud. 61-71 


TABLE    OF   CONTENTS. 


Page, 


CHAPTER  Till.   EPITOMES   AND   CODIFICATIONS. 

A.  Compendiums  of  the  Talmud,  by  Alfasi 
and  by  Asher  b.  Jechiel.  B.  The  Codes,  by 
Maimonides,  by  IMoses  of  Coucy,  by  Jacob  b. 
Asher  and  by  Joseph  Karo.  C.  Collections 
of  the  Agadic  Portions  of  the  Talmud.       -        72-76 

CHAPTER   IX.     MANUSCRIPTS     AND     PRINTED     EDI- 
TIONS. ------  77-80 

CHAPTER   X.      AUXILIARIES  TO  THE  STUDY  OF  THE 
TALMUD. 

A.  Lexicons.  B.  Grammars.  C.  Chres- 
tomathies.  D,  Introductory  Works,  a. 
Older  Works.  6.  Modern  Works  in  He- 
brew, c.  Works  and  Articles  in  Modern 
Languages,  d.  Historical  Works,  e.  En- 
cyclopedical Works.  /.  Some  Other  Books 
of  Reference. 81-87 

CHAPTER  XI.  TRANSLATIONS  OF  THE  TALMUD. 

A.  The  Mishna.     B.   The  Babylonian. 

C.  The  Palestinian  Talmud.  -        -  88-92 

CHAPTER  XII.    BIBLIOGRAPHY. 

Modern  Works  and  Monographs  on  Tal- 
mudlcal  Subjects.         -----      93-102 

CHAPTER  XIII.  1.   OPINIONS  ON  THE  YALUE  OF  THE 

TALMUD.  -----  103-107 

2.   WHY  STUDY   THE   TALMUD.        -        108-114 


PART    II. 

LEGAL  HERMENEUTICS  OF  THE  TALMUD. 

1.  INTRODUCTION. 

Definition.  Plain  and  Artificial  Interpre- 
tation. Legal  and  Homiletical  Interpreta- 
tion.          117-120 

2.  ORIGIN  AND    DEYELOPMENT  OF  ARTIFICIAL  IN- 

TERPRETATION. 

Hillel's  Seven  Hermeneutic  Rules.  A  New 
Method,  by  Nahum.  Development  of  this 
Method,  by  R.  Akiba.  The  Thirteen  Rules 
of  R.  Ibhmael.     Literature.  -       -  120-129 


TABLE    OF    CONTENTS. 


EXPOSITION   OF   HERMENEUTIC   RULES. 

CHAPTER  I.        THE    INFERENCE    FROM    MINOR    AND 
MAJOR. 

CHAPTER  II.      THE   ANALOGY. 

A.  Gezera  Shava.  _        .        .        . 

B.  Heckesh.  -        -        .        .        . 

CHAPTER  III.  GENERALIZATION  OF  SPECIAL  LAWS. 

CHAPTER  IT.  THE  GENERAL  AND  THE  PARTICULAR. 

CHAPTER  V.   MODIFICATIONS  OF  THE  RULE  OF 
GENERAL  AND  PARTICULAR.   - 

CHAPTER  VI.  1.  EXPLANATION  FROM  THE  CONTEXT. 

2.  RECONCILIATION  OF  CONFLICTING 
PASSAGES 

CHAPTER  VII.  ADDITIONAL  RULES. 

A.  Juxtaposition.  B.  Restrictions  in  the 
Application  of  Analogy.  C.  Limited  or 
Unlimited  Effect  of  an  Analogy.  D.  Refu- 
tation and  Reinstatement  of  Hermeneutic 
Arguments.  E.  The  Theory  of  Extension 
and  Limitation.  F.  "  Mikra  "  or  "  Masora." 
Closing  Remark.  -       .       -       - 


Page. 

130-141 

142-152 
152-155 

156-162 

163-168 

169-173 


174-176 


177-187 


PARO:^    III. 
TALMUDICAL  TERMINOLOGY  AND   METHODOLOGY. 


Prefatory. 
CHAPTER    I. 

CHAPTER  II. 
CHAPTER  III. 
CHAPTER  IV. 
CHAPTER  V. 


190 


TERMS  AND  PHRASES  REGARDING 
THE  STRUCTURE  OF  A  MISHNA 
PARAGRAPH 191-197 

MODES  OF  TREATING  AN  ANONYMOUS 

MISHNA   PARAGRAPH.      -        -        -        198-206 


THE       GEMARA 
MISHNA. 


CRITICISING      THE 


207-215 


DISCUSSING     THE     DIFFERENCE     OF 
OPINION    IN    A   MISHNA.         -        -        216-219 

QUOTING  THE  MISHNA  AND  KINDRED 

WORKS 220-223 


TABLE   OF   CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  VI, 


Page. 


DEFINITION  OF  AND   PHRASES   CON- 
CEENING  MEMRA.      -        .        .       "^     224-226 


227-230 


CHAPTER  VII.    TREATMENT  OF  A  PIAIN  MEMRA. 
CHAPTER  VIII.   TREATMENT  OF  A  MEMRA  CONTAIN. 

IN6  A  DIFFERENCE  OF  OPINION.       231-036 
CHAPTER  IX.     ASKING  AND  ANSWERING  QUESTIONS. 

smU  f"^  1.  Questions  of  Investi- 
gation. J.  Questions  of  Astonishment 
^.  Q"«^t'ops  of  Objection.  Some  Cc"ai 
Kmds  of  Objection.  The  Dilemma.  The 
Th«o^^ti^,.Q-«o-.°^  !-blem   an\^  ^^^_^^^ 

CHAPTER   X.      ARGUMEXTATIOJ^. 

1.  Terms  and  Phrases  Introducing  an 
Argument.  2.  Classification  of  Argumf  nts 
a.  Argument  From  Common  SW  ft' 
Argument  From  Authority,  c.  Argument 
From  Construction,  d.  Argumenf Trom 
Analogy.  .^  Argument  a /o.W  3.  IndT- 
rect  Argumentation.  4.  Direct  and  Indirect 
Arguments  Combined.  -        .  -^^^^^ect  ^^^^^^^ 

CHAPTER  XI.     REFUTATION. 

Definition  and  Terms,  a.  The  Refutation 
of  a  Proposition.  6.  Procedure  of  Refuting 
the  Various  Kinds  of  Arguments.  -    ^  254-260 

CHAPTER  XII.   THE   DEBATE. 

baferl^'"'?!!^''?  ^.^'"^^  ^^^  Principal  De- 
baters. Illustration  of  a  Debate.  Anonv- 
mous  Discussions  and  Debates.  -    ^    261-264 


F^ART    IV. 
OUTLINES   OF   TALMUDICAL  ETHICS.     265-280 


^ndex^of*  Fv./'^^^S  Z^  ^^^^^'^  ^"d  Amoraim. 
index  of  Explained  Terms  and  Phrases. 


Ar^F>KNDIX. 

Key  to  the  Abbreviations  used  in  the  Talmud 

and  Its  Commentaries.       -        -        . 
Addenda.       -        -        . 


281-282 
283-285 


286-293 
294-298 


INTRODUCTION 

TO  THE 

TALMUD 

PART  I. 
HISTORICAL  AND  LITERARY  INTRODUCTION. 


THE  TALMUD  AND  ITS  COMPONENT  PARTS. 
§  1. 

The  Talmud  is  the  work  which  embodies  the  mental  labors 
of  the  ancient  Jewish  teachers  during  a  period  of  about  eight 
hundred  years  (from  about  300  before,  to  500  after,  the  Christian 
era)  in  expounding  and  developing  the  civil  and  religious  law 
of  the  Bible.  Besides,  it  contains  the  theosophical  views,  ethical 
maxims  and  exegetical  remarks  of  those  teachers;  it  is  inter- 
woven with  many  valuable  historical  and  ethnographical  records 
and  occasional  references  to  the  different  branches  of  ancient 
knowledge  and  sciences. 

The  Talmud  consists  of  two  distinct  works,  the  Mishna,  as 
the  text,  and  the  Ge??iara  as  a  voluminous  collection  of  com- 
mentaries and  discussions  on  that  text. 

The  appellation  Talmud,  meaning  the  Study,  properly  refers 
to  the  Gemara  only,  but  according  to  a  literary  usage  establish- 
ed m  later  times,  the  name  Talmud  is  applied  also  to  the 
combined  work  of  Mishna  and  Gemara. ' 

We  have  two  compilations  of  the  Gemara,  different  from 
each  other  in  language  as  well  as  in  contents.  One  originated 
in  the  Palestinian,  and  the  other  in  the  Babylonian  schools. 
The  latter  is  called  '>^22  IIdSi  the  Babylonian  Talmud,  and  the 
former  iD^tt^lT  llD^n  the  Palestinian  Talmud.  The  Mishna 
text  in  both  of  them  is  the  same,  though  occasionally  offering 
slight  variations. 


*  As  a  technical  term  the  word  *TitD^n  was  applied  by  the  ancient 
teachers  to  signify  the  method  of  deducing  a  law  from  the  words  of 
Scripture;  compare  the  phrase  "ID")^  Ti^Sn,  Maccoth  I,  7,  a.  o.  Sub- 
sequently the  word  was  applied  to  the  discussions  of  the  teachers  on 
the  Mishna;  compare  Sanhedrin  24a:  ^33  Sc^  miC^n.  After  the  Mishna 
and  Gemara  hrid  been  combined  in  one  work,  it  became  customary 
to  use  the  word  as  an  apiellation  of  the  whole  work. 


CHAPTER  I. 

THE     MISHNA. 

Its  Origin,  Compilation  and  Name. 
§2. 

The  Mishna  is  the  authorized  codification  of  the  oral  or  un- 
written law  which,  on  the  basis  of  the  written  law  contained  in 
the  Pentateuch,  developed  during  the  second  Temple  and  down 
to  the  end  of  the  second  century  of  the  common  era. 

The  oral  law  consisted  partly  of  legal  traditions  and  usages 
which  had  been  handed  down  from  time  immemorial;  partly  of 
enactments  (D^:*'''D1  mn'^U  m:|:n)  of  the  men  of  the  Great 
Synod  or  the  Sopherim,  and  subsequently  of  the  Sanhedrin;  and 
partly  of  the  laws  which  proceeded  from  the  discussions  and  de- 
cisions of  the  teachers,  the  Tanaim,  in  the  Palestinian  academies, 
established  for  the  purpose  of  cultivating  and  transmitting  that 
law.  Its  transmission  was,  for  many  centuries,  confined  to 
verbal  communication,  as  it  was  considered  a  religious  ofience 
to  reduce  the  tradition  to  writing. » 

The  cultivation  of  that  law  consisted  mainly  in  the  endeavor 
to  found  its  provisions  on  a  biblical  basis  and  support,  and  to 
deduce  therefrom  new  provisions  for  cases  not  yet  provided 
for.  This  endeavor  gave  rise  to  discussions  and  a  frequent  con- 
flict of  opinions.  Also  the  reports  of  these  conflicting  opinions 
were  conscientiously  preserved  in  the  memory  of  subsequent 
teachers.  Thus,  in  the  course  of  time,  the  subject  matter  of  the 
oral  law  accumulated  to  an  immense  bulk  which,  not  yet  in  any 
way  systematized,  became  almost  too  heavy  to  be  preserved 
merely  by  the  power  of  memory. 

The  first  attempt  towards  bringing  some  order  and  system 
into  this  chaotic  mass  of  traditions  was  made  by  Hillel,  president 
of  the  Sanhedrin  in  the  time  of  Herod,  by  arranging  it  into  six 
principal   divisions.     His  attempt  was  later  resumed  by  the 

^  In  order  to  assist  their  memory,  however,  some  teachers  had 
private  scrolls  on  which  tliej  for  their  own  use  entered  sinQ;le  the^^es 
of  the  tr  ditional  law.  Such  a  scroll  was  called  Dnno  nPJD  "Secret 
Scroll." 


The  Mishna.  5 

celebrated  R.  Akiba  who  subdivided  the  subject  matter  belonging 
to  each  of  the  six  divisions,  into  homogeneous  parts.  Within 
each  part  again  he  grouped  the  single  laws  according  to  their 
inter-connection  and  according  to  certain  mnemonical  consider- 
ations. The  work  of  R.  Akiba  was  continued  by  his  distinguish- 
ed disciple  R.  Meir  who  completed  the  collection  and  improved 
its  formal  arrangement.  But  neither  this  compilation  of  R. 
Meir  nor  similar  works  of  his  colleagues  succeeded  in  command- 
ing general  recognition,  as  every  teacher  in  the  various  academies 
preferred  to  transmit  and  expound  the  accumulated  material  of 
the  law  according  to  a  method  and  arrangement  of  his  own. 

Finally  R.  Jehuda  Hanasi,  flourishing  towards  the  end  of 
the  second  century,  undertook  the  great  task  of  establishing  a 
general  code  of  the  oral  law.  By  virtue  of  his  eminent  learning, 
his  dignity  as  Patriarch  and  as  head  of  a  celebrated  academy, 
he  succeeded  in  accomplishing  this  task.  Taking  the  unfinished 
work  of  R.  Akiba  and  R.  Meir  as  basis,  and  retaining,  in  gen- 
eral, its  division  and  arrangement,  he  examined  and  sifted  the 
whole  material  of  the  oral  law,  and  completed  it  by  adding  the 
decisions  which  his  academy  gave  concerning  many  doubtful 
cases.  Unanimously  adopted  opinions  he  recorded  without  the 
names  of  their  authors  or  transmitters,  but  where  a  divergence 
of  opinions  appeared,  the  individual  opinion  is  given  in  the 
name  of  its  author,  together  with  the  decision  of  the  prevailing 
majority,  or  side  by  side  with  that  of  its  opponent,  and  sometimes 
even  with  the  addition  of  short  arguments  pro  and  con. 

Like  the  former  compilations  of  the  oral  law,  this  work  of 
R.  Jehuda  was  called  Mishna.  In  order  to  distinguish  it  from 
that  of  R.  Akiba  and  R.  Meir  it  was  originally  designated  the 
Mishna  of  R.  Jehuda,  but  after  having  been  generally  accepted 
as  the  exclusively  authorized  code  of  the  traditional  law,  it  bears 
the  simple  name  Mishna  without  any  further  modification.' 


>  Whether  R.  Jehuda  Hanasi  actually  committed  his  Mishna  to 
writing  or  not,  is  a  question  concerning  which  the  scholars  of  ancient 
as  well  as  of  modern  times  express  dilierent  opinions.  In  accordance 
with  the  principle  mentioned  in  Talm.  Gittin  60  b  and  Temura  14  b 
in   the  name  of  some  teachers,   that  the  oral  law  ought  not   to  be 


6  Historical  a:::)  Literary  Introduction. 

In  later  years  of  his  life,  R.  Jehuda  revised  his  work,  and 
made  several  changes.  Some  additions  were  made  by  his  dis- 
ciples. ' 

Concerning  the  etymology  and  signification  of  the  word 
nJwD   there    is  a  difference  of  opinion.     Some  regard  it  as  a 

feminine  form  of  the  Hebrew  word  nit^D  (analogous  to  the  double 

form  HjpD  and  r\2pt2),  meaning  f/ie  second  in  rank^  hence  a  signi- 

fication  of  the  work  containing  the  oral  law  which  takes  the 
second  rank  compared  with  the  biblical  law;  which  is  considered 
the  first.  In  this  sense  the  word  is  taken  not  only  by  the  fathers 
of  the  Church  who  rendered  it  by  the  term  5^ 7;r£>&9(3z?,  but  also  by 
many  modern  scholars.  Others  derive  it  from  the  verb  nitS^  io 
repeat,  which  in  new   Hebrew,    like  the  Aramaic  S3n  received 


written  down  yro'2  pDJ^P  "'SC'-i  nn«  ^N  HD  t'ynC'  D^^ai  it  is  maintained 
by  Slierira  Gaon  (according  to  one  version  m  his  Iggereth),  by  Rashiin 
his  commentary  on  B.  Metzia  33  a  and  Eriibin  62  b,  by  Tosaphoth  on 
Megilla  32  a,  and  by  some  other  authorities  of  the  Middle  Ages  that  R. 
Jehuda  compiled  his  great  Mishna  work  in  his  mind  without  writing 
it  down,  and  that  it  was  transmitted  only  orally  during  many  gener 
ations,  until  circumstances  in  the  sixth  century  made  it  neccessary  to 
commit  it  to  writing.  This  view  is  accepted  and  defended  even  by 
some  modern  scholars,  as  Luzzatto,  Rapaport,  Jost,  Graetz,  Leopold 
Loew,  and  others. 

More  plausible  is  the  opposite  opinion  holding  that  R.  Jehuda 
Hanasi  wrote  out  the  Mishna  in  full.  This  opinion  is  shared  in  the 
Middle  Ages  by  Samuel  Hanagid,  R.  NIssim,  R.  Abraham  b.  David, 
Maimonides,  and  in  modern  times  by  Geiger,  Frankel,  Lebrecht,  I.  H. 
Weiss,  and  others. 

The  arguments  in  favor  of  the  former  opinion  are  found  in 
Graetz'  Geschichte  der  Juden  IV,  second  edition,  p.  494,  and  in 
Leopold  Loew's  Graphische  Requisiten  II,  pp.  112-132;  the  contrary 
arguments  in  Frankel's  Darke  Hamischna  p.  211:  Weiss'  Dor  Dor  III, 
244-24S.  Compare  also  Hamburger's  Real-Encycl.  II,  p.  7U6,  and  S. 
Adler's  Kobetz  al  Yad,  p.  54. 

*  Clear  evidences  of  such  additions  by  later  hands  are  found  in  the 
^  ast  Mishtia  of  Sota,  where  the  death  of  Rabbi  Is  mentioned,  and  in 
the  last  Mishna  of  Uk'tzin,  where  mention  is  made  of  R.  Joshua  b. 
Levi  who  flourished  after  Rabbi.  As  later  additions  and  interpolations 
must  also  such  passages  as  "it51«  m  or  ^21  nm  be  regarded  which  oc- 
casionally occur  in  the  context  of  the  Mishna,  e.  g.  Nazir  I,  4j  IV, 
5;  Maccoth  I,  8. 


The  Mishna.  T 

the  meaning,  to  relate,  to  teach,  to  transmit  orally.  Mishna  then 
means  the  oral  teaching,  the  instruction  in  the  traditional  law,  in 
contradistinction  to  tr\'p^  the  reading  in  the  written  law  of  the 
Bible. 

The  Division  of  the  Mishna. 
§3. 

The  Mishna  is  divided  into  six  main  sections,  termed  Seda- 
rim  (^'Orders"  or  ^^Series")^  A  mnemonical  sign  of  the  sequence 
of  these  sections  are  the  words  tDp:  JDT  (time  he  took),  formed 
by  the  initials  of  their  names. 

I.  Zeraim  D'^ynT  Seeds  or  productions  of  the  land.  This 
section  embraces  the  ritual  laws  concerning  the  cultivation  of 
the  soil  and  its  products.  It  is  introduced  by  a  treatise  on 
prayer  and  benedictions. 

II.  Moed  -r*;iD  Festival^  treats  of  the  laws  concerning  the 
Sabbath  and  all  festivals. 

III.  Nashim  D''tr:  Women^  regulations  concerning  marriage 
and  divorce. 

lY.  Nezikin  j-'pni  Z>aw^^^j,  embracing  a  great  part  of  the 
civil  and  criminal  law. 

y.  Kodashi?n  D'^tTTp  Sacred  things^  treats  of  the  sacrificial 
laws  and  the  temple  service. 

YI.  Teharoth  T\T\X\^  Purification^  the  laws  concerning  the 
clean  and  unclean. 

Each  Seder  (section)  is  subdivided  into  Masechtoth  or  treat- 
ises, of  which  each  bears  a  name  indicating  its  general  con- 
tents ^ 

The  Mishna  contains  in  all  sixty  three  Masechtoth.  Each 
Masechta  is  again  subdivided  into  Chapters^  called  Perakim,  and 
each  Perek  into  paragraphs,  of  which  each  is  termed  Mishna  or 


^  On  account  of  this  division  of  the  Mishna  into  six  .series  the  whole 
T.'ilmud  is  signified  by  the  technical  term  DC^  wliich  is  an  abbreviation 
of  the  words  DniD  TSZ'X^- 

"  The  word  riDDD  or  NflDDD  is  probably  derived  from  "]DJ  to 
weave,  and  means  then  a  web,  just  as  in  Latin  textus  from  texere, 
means  a  web,  and  then  a  composition  of  words  and  sentences. 


8  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

Halacha.     The  latter  term  for  a  single  paragraph  is  especially- 
used  in  the  Palestinian  Talmud. 


Order  of  Succession,  Names  and  General  Contents  op 
the  Masechtoth. 

Concerning  the  order  in  which  the  Masechtoth  belonging  to 
every  section  follow  after  each  other,  some  difference  appears 
between  the  separate  Mishna  edition  (called  Mishnayoth  nTiJir^D)* 
and  the  arrangement  of  the  Masechtoth  as  generally  adopted  in 
the  editions  of  the  Babylonian  and  the  Palestinian  Talmud. 
This  is  especially  the  case  in  the  Sedarim  II — YI,  while  in  Seder 
I  the  order  of  succession  is  the  same  in  all  editions. 


^  Maimonides  in  the  introduction  to  his  Mishna  commentary- 
endeavors  to  find  some  reasons  for  the  order  of  succession  of  the 
Masechtoth  in  each  Seder.  But  his  reasons  are  often  rather  forced.  R. 
Sherira  Gaon,  in  his  celebrated  epistle  holds  that  the  compiler  of  the 
Mishna  did  not  have  the  intention  to  arrange  the  Masechtoth  according 
to  a  strictly  systematical  order.  This  opinion  is  also  expressed  in  the 
Gemara  B.  Kamma  102  a;  Aboda  Zara  7a  :  niriDDD  nnn  HJ^i'D^  "IID  pX; 
though,  on  the  other  hand,  the  Gemara  sometimes  refers  to  a  close 
connection  of  one  Masechta  with  the  preceding  one,  as  in  the  beginn- 
ing of  Masecheth  Sota  :  niDID  KJD  D"D  \>'h^  "I'TJD  XJD  n3»;  comp. 
also  the  beginning  of  Mas.  Shebuoth  and  of  Taanith. 

Geiger  (Wissenschaftliche  Zeitschrift  II,  p.  487  ss.)  shows  that  in 
the  separate  Mishna  edition,  at  least  in  the  Sedarim  II — VI,  the  Ma- 
sechtoth are  simply  arranged  according  to  the  number  of  Perakim  of 
which  they  consist,  so  that  the  Masechtoth  having  the  greater  number 
stand  first  and  are  gradually  followed  by  those  having  a  lesser  number 
of  Perakim.  Where  the  arrangement  seemingly  deviates  from  this 
rule,  we  can  easily  account  for  the  deviation.  Thus  the  three  Bdbas, 
each  having  ten  Perakim,  are  placed  first  in  Seder  Nezikin,  because  be- 
longing together  and  having  in  all  thirty  Perakim.  They  are  followed 
by  Sanhedrin  having  eleven  Perakim,  and  then  by  Maccoth  which 
though  consisting  only  of  three  Perakim  is  in  its  contents  a  continua- 
tion of  the  subject  treated  in  Sanhedrin,  forming  with  it  fourteen  Pe- 
rakim. 


The  MiSHNi.  9 

The  following  is  a  full  list  of  the  Masechtoth  belonging  to 
each  Seder  and  the  number  of  their  Perakim;  besides  the  order 
of  their  succession  in  the  separate  Mishna  edition  as  well  as  in 
the  two  compilations  of  the  Talmud. 

The  letter  G  added  to  the  number  of  the  order  of  succession 
in  this  list  indicates  that  there  is  Gemara  to  that  Masechta  in 
either  of  the  two  Talmud  compilations. 

I.     Seder  Zeraim,  containing  eleven  Masechtoth. 

Order  of  Succession  in  the 

Separate        TALMUD  „      ^ 

Mishna    _  ,  ,.    ,        ...  Number 

edition.  Babh.  Jerushatmi.  of  Perakim 

1  l.G.      l.Gr.    Berachoth,  ni3"l3/  Benedictions  or  Prayers,      9 

treats  of  liturgical  rules. 

2  2  2.G.    Peahy  nt^D,  Corner,  treats  of  the  corners  and      8 

gleanings  of  the  field,  the  forgotten  sheaves, 
the  olives  and  grapes  to  be  left  to  the  poor, 
according  to  Levit.  XIX  9. 10  and  Deut.  XXIV 
19.  21. 

3  3  8.G.    Demai,  ^XOI,  The  Uncertain,  treats  of  com      7 

bought  from  persons  suspected  of  not  hav- 
ing given  thereof  the  tithes. 

4  4  4.G.    Khilayim,^''^^,  Mixtures,  treats  of  the  pro-      9 

hibited  mixtures  in  plants,  animals  and  gar- 
ments, according  to  Levit.  XIX,  19  ;  Deutr. 
XXII,  9  11. 
6       6  6.G.    Shebiith,  n'^yns^/  The  Sabbatical   year,   ac-    10 

cording  to  Ex.  XXIII,  11;  Lev,   XXV,  2-7; 
Deutr.  XV,  1-11. 

6  6  6.G.     Therumoth,  nionn.  The  Heave  offerings  for    11 

the  priests,  according  to  Numb.   XVIII,  12. 

7  7  7.G.     Maaseroth,  nns^yo,  The  Tithes,  to  be  given      6 

to  the  Levites,    according  to  Lev.   XXVII, 
30-33;  Num.  XVIII,  21-24. 

8  8  8.G.    Maaser  Sheni,  "•Jcr  IK^yD,  The  second  Tithe,      5 

according  to  Deut.  XIV,  22-26. 

9  9  9.G.     Challa,  nbn,  The  Dough,  the  portion  to  be      4 

given  thereof  to  the  Priests,  according  to 
Num.  XV,  20.  21. 
10      10         10. G.     Orla,  rh'\V>  The  Uncircumcised,  treats  of      3 
the  fruits  of  a  tree    during  the    first  four 
years  after  its  planting,   according  to  Lev, 
XIX,  23-25. 


10  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

Order  of  Succession  in  the 

Separate        TALMUD  >t„™u., 

Mishna    „  ^,.    ,         ,    ,    .  Number 

edition.    Babli.  Jerushalmi.  of  Perakim 

11      11  ll.G.    Biccurim,   nni3n,    The    First  fruits  to  be      3 

brought  to  the  Temple,  according  to  Deut. 
XXVI,  1-11. 

II.     Seder  Moed,  containing  twelve  Masechtoth. 

1  l.G.      l.G.     /S'a65af?i,  nnEJ*/ treats  of  the  labors  prohibit-    24 

ed  on  that  day. 

2  2.G.      2.G.     Eruhin,  pniny,  Combinations.  This  Masechta    10 

being  a  continuation  of  the  preceding,  treats 
especially  of  imaginary  combinations  of  loc- 
alities by  which  to  extend  the  Sabbath 
boundary. 

3  3.G.      3.G.     Pesachim,  D^HDD,  treats  of  the  laws  relating    10 

to  the  feast  of  Passover  and  th.e  paschal  lamb. 

4  11  5.G.     ShekaUm,  n'h\>^-  treats  of  the  half  Shekel      8 

which,  according  to  Ex.  XXX,  12-16,  every 
Israelite  had  to  pay  as  a  temple  tax. 

5  8.G.       4.G.     Yoma,    j^rOV,  the  Day,  i.  e.  the  day  of  At-      8 

onement,  according  to  Lev.  XVI,  3-34. 

6  9.G.       6.G.     Succah,  n31D»  treats  of  the  laws  concerning      8 

the  feast  of  Tabernacles,  Lev.  XXIII,  34-36. 

7  4.G.       8.G.    Betza  riTl  or  Yom  tov  iit3  D1\  treats  of  the      6 

kinds  of  work  which,  according  to  Ex.  XII, 
16,  were  prohibited  or  permitted  on  the  fes- 
tivals. The  name  Betza  (the  egg)  is  taken 
from  the  first  word  in  that  Masechta. 

8  7.G.       7.G.   Bosh  Hashana,  n^tJ^H  tJ't^"!,  Beginning  of  the      4 

year,  treats  of  the  feast  of  New  Year. 

9  10. G.       9.G.     Taanith,  n^:yn^  on  the  public  fasts.  4 

10  12. G.     10. G.     i!/egi?ZCT,  n!^^3?0,  the  Scroll,  treats  of  the  read-      4 

ing  of  the  book  of  Esther  on  the  feast  of 
Puriiu. 

11  5.G.     12.  G.     3Ioed  Katon,  |tOp  HI^ID,  Minor  feast,  treats  of      3 

laws  relating  to  tiie  days  intervening  be- 
tween the  first  and  last  da-ys  of  Pesacli  and 
Succoth. 

12  6.G.     ll.G.     Chagiga,  n^JH,  Feast  offering,  treats  of  the      3 

private  offerings  on  the  three  feasts  of  pil- 
grimage, according  to  Deut.  XVI,  16,  17. 
III.     Seder  Nashim,  containing  seven  Masechtoth. 

1        l.G.       l.G.     Yebamoth,   r\\0'y,  Sisters-in-Law,  treats  of    16 
Levirate  marriage,   according  to  Deut.  XXV, 
5-10. 


The  Mishna.  11 

Order  of  Succession  in  the 

Sf-parate        TALMUD  Number 

Son.  B^bli.  Jerushalmi.  of  Perakira 

2  2.G.      3.G.    Khefhubothy  nnin3r  Marriage  deeds,  treats    13 

of  dower  and  marriage  settlements. 

3  5.G.      4.G.    JSledarim,  DniJ,  Vows,  treats  of  vows   and    11 

their  annulment,  with    reference  to  Num. 
XXX,  3-16. 

4  6.G.      6.G.     NaziVy  -T'Ti,  the  Nazarite.  treats  of  the  laws      9 

concerning  him,  according  to  Num.  VI,  2-21. 

5  7.G.      2.G.    Sota,  n'JID,  on  the  woman  suspected  of  adult-    9 

ery,  according  to  Num.  V,  12-31. 

6  4.G.      5.G.     Gittin,  ]^*^>^,  on  Divorces,   based  on  Deut.      9 

XXIV,  1-5. 

7  3.G.      7.G.     KiddusMn,  |"t>^np,  on  Betrothals.  4 

rV.     Seder  Nezikin,  containing  ten  Masechtoth. 

1        l.G.      l.G.    Saba  Xm^o,  J<Op  V 33,  First  Gate,  treats  of    10 
Damages  and  Injuries,   and  their   remedies, 
with  reference  to   Ex,  XXI,  28-37  ;   XXII, 
1-5. 

3  3.G.  2.0-  ^<^^^^  Metzia,  Ny^Vn  ^^22,  Middle  Gate,  10 
treats  of  laws  concerning  found  property 
(Deut.  XXII,  1-4),  concerning  trust  (Ex. 
XXII,  6-14],  concerning  buying  and  selling 
(Lev.  XXV,  14),  lending  [Ex.  XXII,  24-26; 
Lev.  XXV,  35-37}  and  concerning  hiring 
and  renting. 

3  3.G.      3.G.    Baha  Bathra,  «-inn  Snn,  Last  Gate,   treats    10 

of  laws  concerning  real  estate  and  com- 
merce, mostly  based  on  the  traditional  law; 
besides  of  the  laws  concerning  hereditary 
succession,  based  on  Num.  XXVII,  7-11. 

4  5.G.      4.G.     Sanhedrin,  |^-nn:D,  treats  of  the  courts  and    11 

their  proceedings,  and  of  the  punishment 
of  capital  crimes. 

5  7.G.      5.G.    Maccoth,   noo,  Stripes,  treats  of  false  wit-      3 

nesses  and  their  punishment  (Deut.  XIX, 
16-19);  of  the  cities  of  refuge  (Num.  XXXV, 
10-32;  Deut.  XIX,  1-13)  and  of  crimes  pun- 
ished by  stripes  (Deut.  XXV,  1-3. 

6  6.G.      6.G.     Sf/?.c?)?foi/i,  mi;13'.:»,  Oaths,  treats  of  the  differ-  8 

ent  kinds  of  oaths,  those  made  in  private 
life  as  well  as  those  administered  in  court, 
Lev.  V,  4.  5.  21.  22;  Ex.  XXII,  6-10. 


12  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

Order  of  Succession  in  the 

Separate       TALMUD 

Mishna    _  ,  ,     .        u  i     •  Number 

edition.  Babh.  Jerushalmi.  ^j  Perakim 

7  8    Wanting  Eduyoth,  niny,  Testimonies,  contains  a  col-      8 

lection  of  traditional  laws  and  decisions 
gathered  from  the  testimonies  of  disting- 
uished teachers. 

8  4.G.      7.G.    Aboda  Zara,   mT  muy,   Idolatry,  treats  of      5 

laws  concerning  idols  and  the  relation  to 
the  worshipers  thereof. 

9  10    Wanting  Aboth,  nUX,  Fathers  or  Sentences  of  the      6 

Fathers   (the  principal  teachers),    contains 
ethical  maxims  of  the  Mishna  teachers. 
10       9.G.      8.G.    Horayoth,   nviin,  Decisions,    treats  of   the      8 
consequences  of  acting  according  to  errone- 
ous decisions  rendered  by  areligious  author- 
ity, with  reference  to  Lev.  chapters  IV  and  V. 

V.     Seder  Kodashim,  containing  eleven  Masechtoth. 

1  l.G.  Zebachim,    DTIDT/  Sacrifices,    treats  of  the    14 

animal  sacrifices  and  the  mode  of  their  of- 
fering, with  reference  to  the  first  chapters  of 
Leviticus. 

2  2.G.      o         Menachoth,  mnJD,  Meat-offering,   treats  of    13 

meat-and  drink  offerings,  with  reference  to 
;z;  Lev.  ch.  II 

8  4.G.  Cliolin,  (or  ChullinJ  p^in,  Profane  things,    13 

•"I  treats  of  the  traditional  manner  of  slaught- 

ering animals  for  ordinary  use;  besides  of 
(4  the  dietary  laws. 

4  8.G.  Bechoroth,  n'niDl,  The  first  bom,  treats  of      9 

^  the  laws  concerning  the  first  bom  of  man 

and  animals,    according  to  Ex.  VIII,  12.18 
^  and  Num.  XVIII,  15-17. 

5  5.G.  Arachin,  P3"iy,    Estimations,  treats  of  the      9 

^  mode  in  which  persons  or  things  dedicated 

to  the  Lord  by  a  vow  are  legally  appraised 
in  order  to  be  redeemed  for  ordinary  use, 
according  to  Lev.  XXVII,  2-37. 

9  6.G,  Themura,  m"l?::n/    Exchange,  treats  of  the      7 

laws    concerning   sanctified   things  having 
been  exchanged,  according  to  Lev.  XXVII, 
10-27. 
7       7.G.  Kherithoth,  nirT^nD^  Excisions,  treats  of  the      6 

sins  subject  to  the  punishment  of  excision, 
and  their  expiation  by  sacrifices. 


The  Mishna.  13 

Order  of  Succession  in  the 

Separate         TALMUD  Number 

Sol  Bablijerushalmi.  ,        ,         ,,        /^'"T 

8  8  G  Me-ila,  rh'V^^  Trespass  (Sacrilege),  treats  of      6 

the  sins  of   violating  or  profaning  sacred 
rt  things,  according  to  Lev.  V,  15.  16. 

9  10  G      t^  Thamid,  n^DD.  The  Daily  Sacrifice  describes      7 
y      iu.vj.     S5          ^^^  Temple  service  connected  with  the  daily 

•-'  morning  and  evening  offering,  according  to 

H  Ex.  XXIX,  38-41 ;  Num.  XXVUI,  2-8. 

10  11.         »  Middoth,  nilD,  Measurements,  contains  the      5 

<  measurements     and    description     of     the 

^  Temple,  its  courts,  gates  and  halls,  also  de- 

scription of  the  service  of  the  priestly  guards 
in  the  Temple. 

11  9,  Kinnim,    D^:p/    The  bird's  nests,   treats  of      8 

th©  sacrifices  consisting  of  fowls,  the  offer- 
ing of  the  poor,  according  to  Lev.  I,  14;  V, 
7;  Xn,  8. 

VI.    Seder  Teharoth,  containing  twelve  Masechtoth. 
1       2.  Khelim,  D^^3,  Vessels,    treats  of  the    con-    80 

ditions  under  which  domestic  utensils,  gar- 
ments etc.  receive  ritual  uncleanness,  ac- 
rt  cording  to  Lev.  XI,  83-35. 

3       3.  Ohaloth,  Twbm,  Tents,  treats  of  tents  and    18 

»  houses  conveying  the  ritual  uncleanness  of 

a  dead  body,  according  to  Num.  XIX,  14.15. 

3  4.        M  Nega-im,   D^Vi^  Leprosy,  treats  of  the  laws    14 

relating  to  leprosy  of  men,    garments  and 
H  dwellings,  according  to  Lev.  XIII  and  XIV. 

4  6.  Parah,  niD,  The  Heifer,  treats  of  the  laws    12 

»  concerning  the  red  heifer  and  the  use  of  its 

ashes  for  the    purification  of  the  unclean, 
-4  according  to  Num.  XIX. 

6  6.  Teharoth,  nnno.  Purifications.     The  word     10 

^  is  here  used  euphemistically,  as  the  Masech- 

ta  treats  of  some  lesser  degrees  of  unclean- 
ness lasting  only  till  sunset;  e.  g.,  Lev.  XI, 

24-28.  ^. 

0       7  ilfifcvaofTi,  mX^O,  Wells,  treats  of  the  con-    10 

ditions  under  which  wells  and   reservoirs 
are  tit  to  be  used  for  ritual  purifications. 

7  l.G.      l.G.     Nidda,  n-l^  ThR  Menstruous,  treats  of  the    10 

legal  uncleanness  arising  from  certain  con- 
ditions in  women,  according  to  Lev.  XV, 


14  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

Order  of  Succession  in  the 

Separate        TALMUD  ^,      ^ 

Mishna    _  , ,.  ,        ,    ,    •  Number 

edition.  Bablijerushalrai.  of  Perakim 

19-31  and  XII,  3-8. 

8  8.  Mach-shirin,  |''l''C^2D,  Preparations,  treats  of      6 

liquids  that,   according  to  Lev.  XI,  34.  38, 
^  prepare  and  dispose  seeds  and  fruits  to  re- 

ceive ritual  uncleanness. 

9  9.^  Zahim,  wy^,  Persons  suffering  of  running      5 

issues,    treats    of  the    uncleanness    arising 
M  from  such  secretions,  according  to  Lev.  XV, 

2-18. 

10  10.         ^  Tehul  Yom,  DV  ^UD,  Immersed  at  day  time,      4 

treats  of  the  state  of  him  who  at  day  time 
^  immersed  for  his  purification,  while  his  per- 

fect cleanness  according  to  the  law  is  not 
•<  acquired  before  the  setting  of  the  sun. 

11  11  Yadayim,  Dn\  Hands,  treats  of  the  ritual      4 

^  uncleanness  of  hands,  according  to  the  trad- 

itional law,  and  of  their  purification. 

12  12  Uk-tzin,  pvpiy,  Stalks  of   Fruit,   treats  of      3 

stalks  and  shells  of  fruit  in  regard  to  con- 
veying ritual  uncleanness. 

Remark  1.  In  connection  with  the  main  subject  treated 
in  each  Masechta  and  generally  indicated  in  its  name,  occasion- 
ally other  more  or  less  congenial  subjects  are  treated.  Thus, 
for  instance,  the  last  Perakim  of  Masecheth  Megilla  are  devoted 
to  laws  cnncerning  the  sanctity  of  synagogues  and  the  reading 
of  Scriptures  at  the  public  service.  In  the  first  Perek  of  Kid- 
dushin,  after  having  set  forth  the  different  modes  of  contracting 
marriage,  rules  are  incidently  laid  down  concerning  the  legal 
modes  of  acquiring  dilferentkinds  of  property,  etc. 

Remark  2.  The  Perakim  belonging  to  each  Masechta 
are  designated  in  the  separate  Mishna  edition  simply  by  the 
letters  of  the  Hebrew  alphabet,  and  in  the  Talmud  edition  by 
ordinal  numbers  as  well  as  by  a  certain  name  taken  from  the  first 
word  or  words  with  which  that  Perek  begins.  Thus  the  first 
Perek  of  Berachoth  is  designated  in  the  separate  Mishna  edition 
by  'S  p"lS  and  in  the  Talmud  edition  by  ]r^«"l  p"lD/  TiDSD.  In 
earlier  ral)l)inical  literature  references  to  a  certain  Perek  of  the 
Mishna  are  general  !y  made  by  giving  only  the  name  of  that 
Perek  without  stating  the  Masechta  to  which  it  belongs,  as 


The  Mishna.  16 

l\":5SDn  p*iB  referring  to  the  third  Perek  of  Baba  Metzia.  An 
alphabetical  list  of  the  names  of  all  Parakim  with  the  indication 
of  the  Masechtoth  to  which  they  belong  is  found  in  the  appendix 
to ,  Masecheth  Berachoth  in  the  Talmud  editions,  immediately 
after  Maimonides'  Introduction  to  Seder  Zeraim. 

Language  of  the  Mishna. 

§5. 

The  language  of  the  Mishna  is  New  Hebrew,  as  developed 
during  the  period  of  the  second  Temple.  The  Hebrew  having 
been  supplanted  by  the  Aramaic  dialects  as  the  language  of 
common  life,  the  ancient  idiom  was  cultivated  by  the  learned 
for  liturgical  and  legal  purposes.  Many  new  words  and  phrases 
had  to  be  coined  to  express  new  ideas  and  objects,  and  new 
grammatical  forms  and  syntactical  constructions  adopted  for 
the  favored  processes  of  legal  dialectics.  As  far  as  possible 
use  was  made  for  this  purpose  of  new  derivations  of  the  stock 
of  Biblical  words  and  of  some  genuine  Hebrew  roots  ^\hich 
though  not  happening  to  occur  in  the  Biblical  literature  still 
lingered  in  the  memory  of  the  people.  Besides,  recourse  was 
had  to  the  dominating  languages.  From  the  Aramaic  especially 
some  word  roots  and  grammatical  inflections,  derivations  and 
constructions  were  borrowed  and  modified  according  to  the 
genius  of  the  Hebrew  idiom.  Utensils  and  other  objects  and 
ideas  till  then  unknown  were  designated  by  the  same  terms, 
used  by  that  nation  from  which  they  had  been  borrowed.  In 
this  way,  many  Greek  terms  and  with  them  also  some  Latin 
words  more  or  less  modified,  were  adopted  and  naturalized,  i 


*    Modern  works  on  the  language  of  the  Mishna  are: 

M.  I.  Landau,  Geist  und  Sprache  der  Hebraer  nach  dem  zweiten 
Tempelbau  (Prague  1822). 

A.  Geiger.  Lehr-und  Lesebuch  zur  Sprache  der  Mishna  (Breslau, 
1845). 

L.  Dukes,  Sprache  der  Mishna  (Esslingen,  1845). 

J.  H.  Weiss,  Mishpat  Leshoii  ha-Mishna  (Vienna  1867). 

Herm.  L.  Strack  und  C.  Siegfried,  Lehrburh  der  neuhebraeischen 

Sprache  nnd  Literatur,  Karlsruhe  und  Leipzig,  1884. 

Salomon  Stein,  Das  Verbuin  der  Mischnasprache,  Berlin  1888. 


16  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

In  this  New  Hebrew  language,  also  called  the  language  of 
the  sages  (D^il^isn  ptT^  or  \lzrr^  ;vOtr^),  are  composed  not  only  the 
Mishna  but  also  the  kindred  works  to  be  mentioned  in  the  fol- 
lowing chapter. 

As  to  the  style  of  expression,  the  Mishna  is  very  brief  and 
concise  well  calculated  to  impress  itself  upon  the  memory- 


CHAPTER  11. 

WORKS     KINDRED  TO  THE  MISHNA. 

§6. 

There  are  several  works  which  are  kindred  to  the  contents 
of  the  Mishna,  and  originated  partly  before  and  partly  after  its 
close,  though  their  present  shape  belongs  to  a  much  later  period. 
We  refer  to  the  Tosephta^  the  Mechilta^  Siphra  and  Siphre. 
Tnese  works  are  very  important  from  the  fact  that  they  throw 
much  light  on  the  Mishna  in  revealing  the  sources  of  many  of 
its  canons,  and  the  reasons  of  its  diverging  opinions.  For  this 
purpose,  they  are  frequently  quoted  in  the  Gemara.  The  follow- 
ing will  briefly  describe  each  of  these  works. 

a.     The  Tosephta. 

The  word  Tosephta  (KnSDin)  means  Addition,  Supplement, 
and,  as  indicated  by  this  name,  the  work  is  intended  to  complete 
deficiencies  of  the  Mishna.  It  is  divided  into  Mancchtoth,  gene- 
rally corresponding  to  those  of  the  Mischna,  but  diflering  from 
them  in  the  arrangement  of  their  subject,  and  in  the  division  of 
their  Perakim.  The  latter  are  not  subdivided  into  paragraphs. 
There  are  in  all  sixty  Masechtoth  and  452  Perakim.  The  Tosephta 
contains  mainly  the  remnants  of  the  earlier  compilations  of  the 
Halacha  made  by  R.  Akiba,  R.  Meir,  R.  Nehemia,  and  others  not 
adopted  in  the  Mishna,  and,  besides,  additions  made,  after  R. 
Jehuda  Hanasi's  death,  by  his  desciplos  R.  Chiya,  R.Oshaya,  Bar 
Kappara  and  others.  But  we  find  in  that  work  also  many  sayings 
and  decisions  of  later  Amoraim  of  the  Babylonian  and  Palestin- 
ian schools.  In  its  present  shape  it  belongs  to  the  fifth  or 
sixth  century.^ 


*  The  Tosephta  is  usually  printed  as  an  appendix  to  Alphasi's  com- 
pendium of  the  Talmud.  In  the  Vienna  edition  of  the  Habyl.  Talmud 
(1860-72)  the  Mas^xhtoth  of  the  Tosephta  are  appended  to  the  corres- 
ponding Mosechtoth  of  the  Talmud.  A  separate  revised  edition  of  the 
whole  Tosephta  was  published  by  Dr.  Zuckermandel  (Pasewalk  and 
Treves,  1877-82).  Dr.  Adolph  Schwartz  is  publishing  a  new  edition  of  the 


18  Historical  and  Litef.ary  Ixti:o  duct  ion. 

b.     The  Mechilta. 
§  8. 

The  Mechilta,  the  Siphra  and  the  Siphre  have  this  in  com- 
mon, that  they  treat  of  the  oral  law  not  according  to  well  arrang 
ed  subjects,  as  is  the  case  with  the  Mishna  and  the  Tosephta, 
but  rather  in  the  form  of  a  running  commentary  and  discussion 
on  the  biblical  passages  from  which  the  law  is  deduced  or  on 
which  it  is  based. 

The  term  Mechilta  (sn^"'DD),  being  the  Aramaic  equivalent 
of  the  Hebrew  word  HID,  means  originally ''Measure", but  in  the 
rabbinical  language  it  signifies  the  method  of  the  traditional  in- 
terpretation (Midrash),  and  then  a  collection  of  interpretations 
of  the  law. 

The  work  bearing  that  particular  name  contains  a  collec- 
tion of  rabbinical  interpretations  on  several  sections  of  the  second 
book  of  Moses;  beginning  with  Ex.  ch.  XII,  1,  it  goes  on  tillch. 
XXIII,  19.  Of  the  remaining  chapters  it  comments  only  on 
XXXI,   12-n  and  on  XXXY,  1-3. 

Though  principally  of  a  legal  character  (Midrash  Halacha), 
it  has  also  homiletical  interpretations  (Midrash  Agada), 
especially  on  Ex.  XIII,  17-XIX,  25. 

The  Mechilta  is  divided  into  nine  main  sections  (Masechtoth), 
named  according  to  the  contents  of  the  Bible  passage  which  they 
expound,  as  b^riDSI  T^DDO/  nV^'^"!  'Dt2  etc.  Each  Masechta  is 
subdivided  into  chapters  (Parashoth),  the  total  number  of  which 
is  11. 

Passages  from  the  Mechilta  are  occasionally  quoted  in  the 
Talmud,  without  hovv^ever  mentioning  the  name  of  that  book. 
In  the  post-Talmudic  literature  it  is  mentioned  as  'ii  5<n7''2D 
^N*^D'^V     Some   were  therefore  inclined  to  regard  R.  Ishmael 


Tosephta  with  notes  and  text  corrections,  of  which  the  first  volume 
is  out,  Wilna  1891. 

Critical  researches  on  the  Tosephta  are  found  in  Frankl's  Darke 
Hamishna  pp.  B04-307  and  in  I.  H.Weiss',  Dor  Dor  etc.  II  pp.  217-225  ; 
also  in  I.  H.  Duenner's  Wesen  and  Ursprung  der  Tosephta,  Amster- 
dam 1874. 


Works  kixdred  to  the  Mishna  19 

(fioiirishing  in  the  beginning  of  the  second  century)  as  its  author; 
but  against  this  opinion  speaks  the  circumstance  that  the  names 
of  teachers  living  much  later  are  mentioned  in  the  book.  Modern 
scholars  hold  that  the  Mechilta  was  originally  a  collection  of 
teachings  of  R.  Ishmael  and  his  school.  This  collection  having 
been  brought  from  Palestine  to  Babylon, received  there  many  in- 
terpolations. In  the  form  we  possess  it,  the  book  belongs  to  the 
fourth  or  fifth  century/ 

c.     The  Siphra. 

§  9. 

The  Siphra  (S1SD  i.  e.  the  book),  also  called  Torath  Coha- 
nim,  is  a  collection  of  traditional  interpretations  of  the  whole 
book  of  Leviticus,  introduced  by  an  exposition  of  R.  Ishmael's 
thirteen  hermeneutic  rules. 

Different  from  the  Mechilta,  the  style  of  the  Siphra  is  gen- 
erally more  argumentative,  defending  the  traditional  interpreta- 
tions against  possible  objections.  Both  names  of  this  book  are 
mentioned,  and  numerous  passages  thereof  are  quoted,  in  the 
Talmud.  The  authorship  of  its  essential  parts  is  there  ascribed 
to  R.  Jehuda  b.  llai,  a  disciple  of  R.  Akiba  (min*'  'n  S"1SD  DnD 
Sanhed.  86),  and  according  to  this  statementthe  collection  origin- 
ated in  Palestine  in  the  middle  of  the  second  century.  But  in 
the  course  of  time  it  was  considerably''  increased  by  additions 
from  the  hands  of  later  teachers,  especially  those  belonp-ing  to 
the  school  of  Abba  Areca  and  is  therefore  also  called  an  •^2"  S*'£D.'' 

As  before  us,  the  book  has  two  diflcrent  divisions  which  are 

^  The  latest  editions  of  the  IMechilta  with  critical  introductions 
and  annotations  were  published  by  I.  H.  Weiss  (Vienna  .1885)  and  by 
M.  Friedmann  (Vienna  1870.) 

Critical  researches  on  the  Mechilta  are  also  found  in  Frankel's 
Monatschrift  1853,  pp.  888  398,  and  Geigpr's  Urschrift  pp.  140,  152  t^qq. 
and  in  his  Zeitung  1871   pp.  8-28.     I.  H.  Weiss  Dor  Dor  11,  pp.  2-25-231. 

"  The  latest  edition  of  the  Siihrawith  the  commentary  of  R 
Abraham  h.  David  of  Posquieres  (Rabtdj  and  annotations  by  I  H. 
Weiss  was  published  Vienna  1862. 

As  to  critical  reseiirches  on  the  Siphra,  see  Frankel,  IMonat^scbrift 
1854  and  I.  H.  Weiss,  in  his  Introduction  to  the  Siphi-a,  and  in  his  Dor 
Dor  II  p.  231-230. 


20  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

rather  bewildering,  one  according  to  the  customary  Sabbath 
lessons,  Parashoth,  subdivided  into  Perakim;  the  other  according 
to  sections  named  after  their  main  contorts  and  subdivided  into 
chapters  termed  Parasha  or  Parashata. 

d.    The  Siphrb. 

§  10. 

The  Siphre,  or,  as  its  fuller  title  reads,  2^  t^i  ''^SD  (the 
books  of  the  school  of  Rab),  comprises  the  traditional  interpret- 
ations of  the  book  of  Numbers,  beginning  with  chapter  Y,  and 
of  the  whole  book  of  Deuteronomy.  The  author  of  the  Siphre  on 
Numbers  was  evidently  not  the  same  as  the  author  of  that  on  the 
last  book  of  the  Pentateuch.  The  style  of  the  former,  being  more 
argumentative  and  discoursive,  often  resembles  that  of  the  Siphra, 
while  Siphre  on  Deuteronomy  is  generally  brief,  bearing  more 
resemblance  to  the  Mechilta.  The  passages  anonymously  given 
in  the  Siphre  are  ascribed  in  the  Talmud  to  R.  Simon  b.  Jochai, 
one  of  the  distinguished  disciples  ofR.  Akiba  (jl^ot^*  'n''n£D  QHD 
Sanhedidn  86a);  but,  as,  on  the  one  hand,  many  of  those  passages 
can  be  traced  back  to  the  school  of  R.  Ishmael,and,  on  the  other 
hand,  teachers  of  a  much  later  period  are  mentioned  therein, 
it  is  the  opinion  of  modern  scholars  that  the  Siphre  before  us  is 
a  composite  of  two  different  works  which, like  the  Siphra,  receiv- 
ed its  present  shape  in  the  Babylonian  shools  founded  by  Abba 
Areca. 

The  Siphre  is  divided  into  sections  corresponding  to  those 
of  the  Sabbath  lessons  and  subdivided  into  paragraphs,  termed 
Piskoth.  That  on  Numbers  has  161,  and  that  on  Deuterenomy 
357  Piskoth.^ 

e.     Baraitha. 
§11. 

Besides  the  Tosephta,  the  Mechilta,  the  Siphra  and  the 
Siphre  just  described,  other  collections  of  a  similar  character 
existed    during  the  Talmudical  period.     In  the  course  of  time 


*     The  latest  edition  of  the  Siphre  with  annotations  is  that  of  M. 
Friedmann,  Vienna  1864. 


Works  kindred  to  the  Mishna.  21 

they  perished,  but  many  hundred  fragmentary  passages  thereof 
are  quoted  in  all  parts  of  the  Palestinian  and  Babylonian  Ge- 
mara.  Such  a  passage  quoted  from  those  lost  collections  as  well, 
as  from  the  Tosephta,  Mechilta,  Siphra  and  Siphre  was  termed 
Baraitha  (Sn''"'"l2);  or  Mathnitha  Baraitha^  meaning  an  extrane- 
ous Mishna.  This  term  was  used  in  order  to  distinguish  those 
passages  from  passages,  in  our  Mish?ia^  that  is,  the  authorized 
Mishna  of  R.  Jehuda  Hanasi,  compared  with  which  they  had 
but  a  subordinate  value.  The  Baraithoth  are  often  found  to  be 
conflicting  with  each  other  or  with  the  authorized  Mishna,  and 
in  this  case  the  Gemara  usually  displays,  great  ingenuity  and 
subtility  in  the  attempt  to  reconcile  them.  In  some  instances, 
however,  one  or  the  other  Baraitha  is  declared  to  be  spurious,  i 


»    Some  critical  researches  on  the  Baraitha  are  found  in  Frankel's 
Darke  Hamishna  p.  311-313,  and  in  I.  H.  Weiss,  Dor  Dor  II  p.  239-244. 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE  AUTHORITIES  OF  THE  MISHKA. 
§12. 

The  authorities  mentioned  in  the  Mishna  and  Baraitha  as 
having  transmitted  and  developed  the  oral  law  belong  to  three 
different  periods,  namely: 

1.  The  period  of  Sopherim 

2.  The  period  of  Zugoth^  and 

3.  The  period  of  Tanaim. 

a.  Sopherim  or  scribes  were  the  learned  men  who  succeed- 
ed Ezra  during  a  period  of  about  two  hundred  years.  To  them 
many  institutions  and  extensions  of  the  Mosaic  law  are  ascribed 
D^IDID  ''^31  /D'^nSlD  niJpn.  The  Sopherim  are  also  called  collect- 
ively n^nn  nD33  ^^^'I'is  the  Men  of  the  Great  Synod.  According 
to  tradition,  this  synod  consisted  of  120  members,  but  we  have 
no  record  of  their  names  with  the  exception  of  Ezra,  its  founder, 
and  of  Smion  the  Just  (the  high  priest  Simon  I,  between  310-292, 
or  his  grandson  Simon  II,  between  220-202  B.  C.)  who  is  said 
to  have  been  one  of  the  last  members  of  the  Great  Synod. 

Antigonos  of  Socho^  a  disciple  of  Simon  the  Just,  was  the 
connecting  link  between  this  and  the  following  period. 

b.  The  word  Zugoth  (myiT),  meaning  the  pairs  (duumviri), 
is  the  appellation  of  the  leading  teachers  from  Jose  ben  Joezer 
till  Hillel,  of  whom  always  two,  at  the  same  time,  stood  at  the 
head  of  the  Sanhedrin,  one  as  president  (Nasi),  and  the  other 
as  vice-president  (Ab  beth  din). 

The  succession  of  these  Zugoth  was: 

1.  Jose  ben  Joezer  and  Jose  ben  Jochanan,    flourishing    at 
the  time  of  the  Maccabean  wars  of  independence. 

2.  Joshua  b.   Ferachia  and  Nitai  of  Arbela,  flourishing  at 
the  time  of  John  Hyrcan. 


The  Authorities  of  the  Mishna.  23 

3.  Juda  h.  Tahai  and  Simon  b.   Shetach^   flourishing  at  the 
time  of  Alexander  Janai  and  queen  Salome. 

4.  Shemaiah    and  Abtalion^     flourishing     at   the  time   of 
Hyrcan  II. 

5.  Hillel  and  Shamat\  flourishing   at  the  time   of  king 
Herod. 

c.  With  the  disciples  of  Hillel  and  Shamai  begins  the 
period  of  Janaim^  which  lasted  about  210  years  (from  10  to  220 
Ch.  Era).  With  the  beginning  of  this  period  the  title  Rabbi 
(my  teacher)  for  the  ordained  teachers,  and  the  title  Rabban^  our 
teacher)  for  the  president  of  the  Sanhedrin  came  in  use. 

In  the  Mishna,  the  term  Tana  (^:n),  meaning  a  teacher  of 
the  oral  law,  does  not  yet  occur.  Those  teachers  are  there  sig- 
nified by  generally  adding  the  title  of  Rabbi  to  their  names,  or 
by  calling  them  collectively  □''Drn  the  Sages,  while  the  author- 
ities of  the  preceding  period  are  occasionally  designated  D'':pT 
D^'iVw^in  the  former  elders.  It  is  first  in  the  Gemara  that  the 
term  Tana  (S^n)  is  applied  to  a  teacher  mentioned  in  the 
Mishna  and  Baraitha,  in  contradistinction  to  the  Amorai7n^  ex- 
pounders of  the  Mishna,  as  the  teachers  after  R.  JehudaHanasi 
are  called. 

The  period  of  the  Tanaim  is  generally  divided  into  5  or  6 
minor  sections  or  generations.  The  purpose  of  this  division  is 
to  show  which  teachers  developed  their  principal  activity  con- 
temporaneously, though  the  actual  lifetime  of  some  of  them  ex- 
tended to  more  than  one  generation. 

The  following  chronological  tables  contain  the  names  only 
of  the  more  prominent  teachers  of  each  generation.  Every 
table  is  followed  by  short  biographical  sketches  of  the  teachers 
mentioned  therein.^ 


*  Fuller  characteristics  of  the  lives  and  teachings  of  the  principal 
Tanaim  are  given  in  the  following  works: 

Graetz,  History  of  the  Jews,  Vol.  IV. 

Z.  Frankel,  Darke  Hamishna. 

I.  H.  Weiss,  Zur  Geschichte  der  juedischen  Tradition,  Vol.  I. 
and  II. 

Jacob  Bruell,  Mebo  Hamishna,  Vol.  I. 

J.  Hamburger,  Koal  Eucyclopaedie,  Vol.  IL  Die  Taknudischen 
Artikel. 

M.  Braunsohweiger,  Die  Lehrer  der  Mishnah. 


24  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

The  first  Generation  of  Tanaim. 
§  13. 

The  principal  Tanaim  of  the  first  generation,  which  lasted 
about  seventy  years  \  from  10  to  80,  C.  E.,  are: 

1.  The  School  of  Shamai,  and  the  School  of  Hillel 

2.  Akabia  ben  Mahalalel. 

3.  Rabban  Gamaliel  the  Elder. 

4.  Rabbi  Chanina,  Chief  of  the  Priests. 

5.  R.  Simon  ben  Gamaliel. 

6.  R.  Jochanan  ben  Zaccai. 

Characteristics  and  Biographical  Sketches. 

1.  The  School  of  Shamai  and  the  School  of  Hillel  were  founded 
by  the  disciples  of  the  great  teachers  whose  names  they  bear.  Follow- 
ing the  principles  of  their  masters,  they  differed  widely  in  their  opinions 
on  many  legal  questions;  the  School  of  Shamai,  in  general,  taking  a 
rigorous,  and  the  school  of  Hillel  a  more  lenient  view  of  the  question. 
In  their  frequent  controversies  the  School  of  Shamai,  having  been 
founded  already  during  the  life  time  of  Hillel,  is  always  mentioned 
first.  Of  individual  teachers  belonging  to  either  of  these  two  schools 
only  a  very  few  are  occasionally  mentioned  by  name.  Both  schools  exist- 
ed during  the  whole  period  of  the  first  generation,  and  the  antagonism 
of  their  followers  extended  even  to  the  middle  of  the  subpequent  gener- 
ation. 

2.  Akahia  ben  Mahalalel  Of  this  teacher  who  flourished 
shortly  after  Hillel  only  a  few  opinions  and  traditions  are  recorded. 
According  to  what  is  related  of  him  in  Mishna  Eduyoth  V,  6.  7,  he 
was  a  noble  character  with  unyielding  principles. 

3.  Rabban  Gamaliel  the  Elder.   He  was  a  son  of  E.  Simon,  and 
grandson  of  Hillel  whom  he  succeeded  in  the  office  of  Nasi.    Many 
important  ordinances  (niJpn)  of  the  Rabbinical  law  are  ascribed  to  him 
He  died    eighteen    years    before  the    destruction  of  Jerusalem.     Th 
epithet  "the  Elder"  generally  added  to  his  name,  is  to  distinguish  him 


*  This  comparatively   great  length  of  the  first  generation  is  easily 
explained  by  the  circumstance, that  it  refers  to  the  duration  of  the  pre 
vailing  Schools  of  Shamai  and  [Jillel,and  not,  as  in  the  snl)sequent  gen 
erations,  to  that  of  the  activity  of  a  single  leading  teacher. 


The  Authorities  of  the  Mishna.  25 

from  his  grandson  Gamaliel  of  Jabne,  who  flourished  in  the  following 
generation. 

4.  Rahhi  Chanina,  Chief  of  the  Priests,  or  the  proxy  of  the  high- 
priest.  He  as  well  as  "the  court  of  Priests"  D'jns  b\y  T'3  are  inciden- 
tally mentioned  in  the  Mishna  in  connection  with  laws  concerning  the 
sacrifices  and  the  temple  service. 

5.  B.  Simon  ben  Gamaliel.  He  was  the  son  and  successor  of  Rab- 
ban  Gamaliel  the  Elder,  and  was  executed  by  the  Romans  in  the  time 
of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  Belonging  to  the  school  of  Hillel, 
his  individual  opinions  in  questions  of  law  are  but  rarely  recorded  in 
the  Mishna.  He  must  not  be  confounded  with  his  grandson  who  had 
the  same  name  and  belonged  to  the  fourth  generation  of  Tanaim. 

6.  R.  Jochanan  h.  Zaccai.  This  distinguisl.ed  teacher  was  one  of 
the  youngest  disciples  of  Hillel,  occupied  a  high  ])osition  already  be- 
fore the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  afterwards  became  the  founder 
and  head  of  the  celebrated  academy  of  Jabne  (Jamnia). 

Of  other  authorities  belonging  to  the  first  generation  of  Tanaim, 
mention  must  be  made  of  Adman,  Chanan  and  ISachum  the  Mede,  who 
were  civil  judges  before  the  time  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  and 
whose  legal  opinions  are  occasionally  recorded  in  the  Mishna. 

The  Second  Generation  of  Tanaim, 
§14. 

This  generation  lasted  about  forty  years,  from  80  to  120. 
The  principal  Tanaim  belonging  to  it  are: 

1.  Rabban  Gamaliel  II  (of  Jabne). 

2.  Rabbi  Zadok. 

3.  R.  Dosa  (b.  Harchinas). 

4.  R.  Eliezer  b.  Jacob. 

6.  R.  Eliezer  (b.  Hyrcanos). 

6.  R.  Joshua  (b.  Chanania). 

7.  R.  Elazar  b.  Azaria. 

8.  R.  Juda  b.  Bathyra. 

Characteristics  and  Biographical  Sketches. 

1.  Rabban  Gamaliel  II.  He  was  a  grandson  of  Gamaliel  the  Elder; 
after  the  death  of  R.  Jochanan  b.  Zaccai  he  became  president  of  the 


26  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

academy  of  Jabne,and  like  his  ancestors,  he  bore  the  title  Nasi  [Prince); 
with  the  Romans,  Patriarch.  In  order  to  distinguish  him  from  his 
grandfather,  he  received  the  surname  Gamaliel  of  Jabne,  or  the 
Second. 

3.  R.  Zadok.  Of  him  it  is  related  that  he,  in  anticipation  of  the 
destruction  of  the  Temple,  fasted  for  forty  successive  years.  He  then 
removed  to  Jabne  where  he  as  well  as  his  son,  R.  Eliezerb.  Zadok,  be- 
longed to  the  distinguished  teachers. 

3.  R.  Dosa  b.  Harchinas  belonged  to  the  school  of  Hillel,  and 
removed  with  R.  Jochanan  b.  Zaccai  from  Jerusalem  to  Jabne  where 
he  reached  a  very  old  age.  He  stood  in  such  high  esteem  that  his  most 
distinguished  colleagues  appealed   to  his  opinion  in  doubtful  cases. 

4.  R.  Eliezer  h.  Jacob  was  head  of  a  school,  and  in  possession  of 
traditions  concerning  the  structure  and  interior  arrangements  of  the 
temple.  He  is  also  mentioned  with  commendation  as  to  his  method  of 
instruction  whicn  was  "concise  and  clear"  ("ipjl  2p).  There  was  also  an- 
other Tana  by  a  similar  name  who  flourished  in  the  fourth  generation. 

5.  R.  Eliezer  b.  Hyrkanos,in  the  Mishna  called  simply  R.  Eliezer, 
was  one  of  the  most  distinguished  disciples  of  R.  Jochanan  b.  Zaccai 
who  characterized  him  as  "the  lime  cemented  cistern  that  does  not 
lose  a  drop''.  He  was  a  faithful  conservator  of  handed-down  decisions 
and  opposed  to  their  slightest  modification  and  to  any  new  deductions 
to  be  made  therefrom.  His  school  was  in  Lydda,  in  South  Judea. 
Though  formerly  a  disciple  of  the  Hillelites,  he  inclined  to  the  views 
of  the  Sbamaites  and  consequently  came  in  conflict  with  his  colleagues. 
Being  persistent  in  his  opinion,  and  conforming  to  it  even  in  practice, 
he  was  excommunicated  b}'  his  own  brother-in-law,  the  patriarch 
Gamaliel  II. 

6.  R.  Joshua  b.  Chanania,  in  general  called  simply  R.  Joshua, 
uas  likewise  one  of  the  favored  disciples  of  R.  Jochanan  b.  Zaccai. 
Shortly  before  the  destruction  of  the  Temple  he  left  Jerusalem  with 
his  teacher,  after  whose  death  he  founded  a  separate  school  in  Bekiin. 
As  member  of  the  Sanbedrin  in  Jabne,  he  participated  conspicuously 
in  its  deliberations  and  debates.  His  discussions  were  mostly  with 
R.  Eliezer  to  whose  unyielding  conservatism  he  formed  a  striking  con- 
trast, as  he  represented  the  more  rational  and  conciliatory  element  of 
that  generation,  and  combined  with  great  learning  the  amiable  virtues 


The  Authorities  of  the  Mishna.  2T 

of  gentleness,  modesty  and  placability  which  characterized  the  Hil- 
lelites.  As  lie,  on  several  occasions,  was  humiliated  by  the  Nasi  Gamaliel 
II  with  whom  he  differed  on  some  questions,  the  members  of  the  San- 
hedrin  resented  this  insult  of  their  esteemed  colleague  by  deposing  the 
offender  from  his  dignity  and  electing  another  president.  It  was 
only  through  the  interference  of  the  appeased  R.  Joshua  that  R.  Gam- 
aliel, who  apologized  for  his  conduct,    was  again  restored  to  his  office. 

7.  R.  Elazar  b.  Azaria  descended  from  a  noble  family  whose 
pedigree  was  traced  up  to  Ezra  the  Scribe.  Already  while  a  young 
man,  he  enjoyed  such  a  reputation  for  his  great  learning  that  he  was 
made  president  of  the  academy  at  Jabne  in  place  of  the  deposed  R. 
Gamaliel.  When  the  latter  was  reinstated,  R.  Elazar  was  appointed 
as  vice-president.  His  controversies  were  mostly  with  R.  Joshua,  R. 
Tarphon,  R.  Ishmael  and  K.  Akiba.  On  account  of  the  noble  virtues 
M^hich  he  combined  with  his  great  learning  he  was  compared  to  "a 
vessel  filled  with  aromatic  spices",  and  R.  Joshua  said  of  him:  "a gen- 
eration having  a  man  like  R.  Elazar  b.  Azaria,   is  not  orphaned". 

8.  R.  Juda  b.  Bathyra  had  a  school  in  Nisibis  (in  Assyria) 
already  at  the  time  when  the  temple  of  Jerusalem  was  still  in  exist- 
ence. He  was  probably  a  descendant  of  the  family  Bene  Bathyra  who 
were  leaders  of  the  Sanhedrin  under  king  Herod,  and  who  resigned 
that  office  in  favor  of  Hillel.  Several  other  Tanaim  had  the  same 
family  name,  as  R.  Joshua  b.  Bathyra,  R.  Simon  b.  Bathyra  and  one 
called  simply  Ben  Bathyra. 

Of  other  teachers  belonging  to  the  second  generation  we  have  yet 
to  mention  R.  Nechunia  b.  Hakana  who  was  the  teacher  of  R.  Ishmael. 
and  Nachum  of  Gimzo  who  introduced  the  hermeneutic  rule  of  "ni 
DI^Cl  (extension  and  limitation)  which  was  later  further  developed 
by  his  great  disciple  R.  Akiba. 


28  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

The  third  Generation  of  Tanaim. 

§  15. 

Several  Teachers  of  the  tliird  generation,  which  lasted  from 
the  3' ear  120  till  about  130,  flourished  already  in  the  preceding 
one.     The  principal  teachers  are: 

1.  R.  Tarphon. 

2.  R.  Ishmael. 

3.  R.  Akiba. 

4.  R.  Jochanan  b.  Nuri. 

5.  R.  Jose  the  Galilean. 

6.  R.  Simon  b.  Nanos. 

7.  R.  Juda  b.  Baba. 

8.  R.  Jochanan  b.  Broka. 

Characteristics  and  Biographical  Sketches. 

1.  R.  Tarphon,  or  Tryplion,  of  Lydda.  He  is  s^id  to  have  been 
inclined  to  the  vie^vs  of  the  School  of  Shamai.  On  account  of  his 
gi-eat  learning  he  was  called  * -the  teacher  of  Israel";  besides,  he  was 
praised  for  his  great  charitable  works.  His  legal  discussions  were 
mostly  with  his  colleague  R.  Akiba. 

2.  R.  Ishmael  (b.  Elisha)  was  probably  a  grandson  of  the  high 
priest  Ishmael  b.  Elisha  who  was  condemned  to  death  by  Titus  together 
with  the  patriarch  Simon  b.  Gamaliel  I.  When  still  a  boy,  he  was 
made  a  captive  and  brought  to  Rome,  where  R.  Joshua  who  happened 
to  come  there  on  a  mission,redeemed  him  at  a  high  ransom  and  brought 
him  back  to  Palestine.  R.  Nechunia  b.  Hakana  is  mentioned  as  one 
of  his  principal  teachers.  When  grown  to  manhood,  he  became  a 
member  of  the  Sanhedrin  and  was  highly  revered  by  his  colleagues. 
He  is  named  among  those  who  emigrated  with  the  Sanhedrin  from 
Jabne  to  Usha.  His  residence  was  in  South  Judea  in  a  place  called 
Kephar  Aziz.  His  academical  controversies  were  mostly  with  R. 
Akiba  to  whose  artificial  methods  of  interpreting  the  law  he  was 
strongly  opposed,  on  the  principle  that  the  Thora,  being  composed  in 
the  usual  language  of  man,  must  be  interpreted  in  a  plain  and  ration- 
al way.  As  guiKng  rules  of  interpretation  he  accepted  only  the  seven 
logical  rules  which  had   been  laid  down  by  Hillel,  which  he  however. 


The  Authorities  of  the  Mishna.  29 

by  some  modifications  and  stibdivisionR,  enlarged  to  thirteen.  Of  these 
thirteen'rulea  we  shall  treat  in  the  second  part  of  this  work.  A  separate 
school  which  he  founded  was  continued  after  his  death  by  his  dis- 
ciples and  was  known  by  the  name  of  "Be  R.  Ishmael".  Of  the  book 
il/(3c//?7^a  which  is  ascribed  to  R.  Ishmael  and  his  school  we  have  spoken 
above  (p.  18). 

3.  R.  Akiha  (b.  Joseph)  was  the  most  prominent  among  the 
Tanaim.  He  is  said  to  have  descended  from  a  proselyte  family  and  to 
have  been  altogether  illiterate  up  to  the  age  of  his  manhood.  Filled  with 
the  desire  to  acquire  the  knowledge  of  the  law,  he  entered  a  school 
and  attended  the  lectures  of  the  distinguished  teachers  of  that  time, 
especially  of  R.  Eliezer  b.  Hyrkanos,  R.  Joshua  b.  Chanania,  and  of 
Nacluim  of  Gimzo.  Subsequently  he  founded  a  school  in  B'ne  Brak, 
near  Jabne,  and  became  a  member  of  the  Sanhedrin  in  the  last  men- 
tioned city.  Through  his  keen  intellect,  his  vast  learning  and  his 
energetic  activity  he  wielded  a  great  influence  in  developing 
and  diffusing  the  traditional  law.  He  arranged  the  accumulated 
material  of  that  law  in  a  proi:)er  system  and  methodical  order,  and 
enriched  its  substance  with  many  valuable  deductions  of  his  own.  His 
methodical  arrangement  and  division  of  that  material  was  completed 
by  his  disciple  R.  Meir,  and  la+or  on  became  the  groundwork  of  the 
Mishna  compiled  by  R.  Jehuda  Hanasi.  Besides,  he  introduced  a  new 
method  of  interpreting  the  Scriptures  which  enabled  him  to  find  a 
biblical  basis  for  almost  every  provision  of  the  oral  law.  This  ingen- 
ious method,  which  will  be  described  in  the  II  Part  of  this  book,  was 
admired  by  his  contemporaries,  and  notwithstanding  the  opposition  of 
some  of  his  colleagues,  generally  adopted  in  addition  to  the  13  hermen- 
eutic  rules  of  R.  Ishmael.  R.  Akiba's  legal  opinions  are  very  frequently 
recorded  in  all  parts  of  the  Mishna  and  in  the  kindred  works.  His  acad- 
emical discussions  are  mostly  with  his  former  teachers  R.  Eliezer,  R. 
Joshua  and  with  his  colleagues  R.  Tarphon,  11.  Jochanan  b,  Nuri,  R. 
Jose  the  Galilean  and  others. 

R.  Akiba  died  a  martyr  to  religion  and  patriotism.  Having  been 
a  stout  supporter  of  the  cause  of  Bar  Cochba,  he  was  cruelly  executed 
by  the  R(jmans  for  publicly  teaching  the  Law  contrary  to  the  edict  of 
the  emperor  Hadrian. 

4.  jK.  Jochanan  b.  Nuri  was  a  colleague  of  R.  Akiba  with  wliom 
he  frequently  differed  on  questions  of  the  law.  In  his  youth  beseems 
to  have  been  a  disciple  of  R.  Gamaliel  H.  for  whose  memory  he  always 


30  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

retained  a  warm  veneration.    He  presided  over  a  college  in  Beth  She- 
arim,  a  place  near  Sepphoris  in  Galilee. 

5.  R.  Jose  the  Galilean  was  a  very  distinguished  teacher.  Of 
his  youth  and  education  nothing  is  known.  At  his  first  appearance  in 
the  Sanhedrin  of  Jabne,  he  participated  in  a  debate  with  R  Tarphon 
and  with  R.  Akiba  and  displayed  such  great  learning  and  sagacity 
that  he  attracted  general  attention.  From  this  debate  his  reputation  as 
a  teacher  was  established.  He  was  an  authority  especially  in  the  laws 
concerning  the  sacrifices  and  the  temple  service.  His  discussions  were 
mostly  with  R.  Akiba,  R.  Tarphon  and  R.  Elazar  b.  Azariah.  Of  his 
domestic  life  it  is  related  that  he  had  the  bad  fortune  of  having  an  ill- 
tempered  wife,  who  treated  him  so  meanly  that  he  was  compelled  to 
divorce  her,  but  learning  that  she  in  her  second  marriage  lived  in  great 
inisery,he  generously  provided  her  and  her  husband  with  all  the  neces- 
saries of  life.  One  of  his  sons,  R.  Eteazar  b.  R.  Jose  the  Galilean, 
became  a  distinguished  teacher  in  the  following  generation  and  estab- 
lished the  thirty  two  hermeneutic  rules  of  the  Agada. 

6.  jB.  Simon  &.  Nanos,  also  called  simply  Ben  Nanos,  was  a 
great  authority  especially  in  the  civil  law,  so  that  R.  Ishmael  recom- 
mended to  all  law  students  to  attend  the  lectures  of  this  profound 
teacher.  His  legal  controversies  were  mostly  with  R.  Ishmael  and  R. 
Akiba. 

7.  R.  Judah  b.  Baba,  who  on  account  of  his  piety  was  called 
the  Chasid,  is  noteworthy  not  only  as  a  distinguished  teacher  but  also 
as  a  martyr  to  Judaism.  Contrary  to  the  Hadrianic  edict  which, under 
extreme  penalty,  prohibited  the  ordination  of  teachers,  he  ordained 
seven  disciples  of  R.  Akiba  as  Rabbis,  and  for  this  act  was  stabbed  to 
death  by  the  Roman  soldiers. 

8.  R.  Joclianan  b.  Brolca  was  an  authority  especially  in  the  civil 
law.  Also  his  son  R.  Ishmael  was  a  distinguished  teacher  who  flourish- 
ed in  the  following  generation .  Of  other  teachers  belonging  to  this 
generation  the  following  are  to  be  mentioned.  R,  Elazar  (or  Eliezer) 
of  Modin,  an  authority  in  Agada  interpretation.  R.  Mathia  b.  Charash 
who,  formerly  a  disciple  of  R.  Eliezer  b.  Hyrkanos,  founded  a  school  in 
the  city  of  Rome  and  thus  was  the  first  teacher  who  transplanted  the 
knowledge  of  the  rabbinical  law  from  Asia  to  Europe;  further,  several 
of   R,    Akiba's    earlier  disciples,   especially    (Simon)  Ben  Zoma    and 


The  Authorities  of  the  Mishna.  31 

(Simon)  BcnAzai,  both  of  whom,  besides  being  distinguished  in  the 
law,  were  also  deeply  engaged  in  the  tl>eosophic  speculations  of  those 
times. 

The  fourth  Generation  of  Tanaim. 

§  16. 

This  generation  extended  from  the  death  of  R.  Akiba  to 
the  death  of  the  patriarch  R.  Simon  b.  Gamaliel  II,  from  the 
year  139  to  about  165.  Almost  all  loading  teachers  of  this  ge- 
neration belong  to  the  latter  disciples  of  R.  Akiba. 

1.  R.  Meir. 

2.  R.  Jehuda  (ben  Bai). 

3.  R.  Jose  (ben  Chalafta). 

4.  R.  Simon  (b.  Jochai). 

5.  R.  Elazar  (b.  Shamua). 

6.  R.  Jochanan  the  Sandelar. 
T.  R.  Elazar  b.  Jacob. 

8.  R.  Nehemia. 

9.  R.  Joshua  b.  Korcha. 
10.     R.  Simon  b.  Gamaliel. 

Characteristics  and  Biographical  Sketches. 
1.  R.  Meir,  the  most  prominent  among  the  numerous  disciples 
of  R.  Akiba,  was  a  native  of  Asia  Minor  and  gained  a  subsistence  as 
a  skilf  nil  cop:y  ist  of  sacred  Scripture.  At  first,  he  entered  the  acad- 
emy of  R.  Akiba,  but  finding  himself  not  sufficiently  prepared  to 
grasp  the  lectures  of  this  great  teacher,  he  attended,  for  some  time, 
the  school  of  R.  Ishmael,  where  he  acquired  an  extensive  knowledge 
of  the  law.  Returning  then  to  R.  Akiba  and  becoming  his  constant  and 
favored  disciple,  he  developed  great  dialectical  powers.  R.  Akiba 
soon  recognized  his  worth  and  preferred  him  to  other  disciples  by 
ordaining  him  at  an  early  date.  This  ordination  was  later  renewed 
byR.  Judahb.  Baba.  On  account  of  the  Hadrianic  persecutions,  R.  Meir 
had  to  flee  from  Judea,  but  after  the  repeal  of  those  edicts,  he 
returned  and  joined  his  colleagues  in  re-establishing  the  Sanhedrin 
in  the  city  of  Usha,  in  Galilee.  His  acarL-^niy  was  in  Emmaus,  near 
Tiberias,  and  for  a  time  also  in  Ardiscus  near  Damascus  where  a  large 


32  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

circle  of  disciples  gathered  around  him.  Under  the  patriarch  R. 
Simon  b.  Gamaliel  II  he  occupied  the  dignity  of  a  Chacham  (advising 
Sage),  in  which  office  ho  was  charged  with  the  duty  of  pre- 
paring the  subjects  to  be  disci  ssed  in  tne  Sanhedrin.  A  conflict 
which  arose  between  him  and  the  patriarch  seems  to  have  induced 
him  to  leave  Palestine  and  return  to  his  native  country,  Asia  Minor, 
where  he  died.  R.  Meir's  legal  opinions  are  mentioned  almost  in  every 
Masechta  of  the  Mishna  and  Baraitha.  His  greatest  merit  was  that 
he  continued  the  labors  of  R.  Akiba  in  arranging  the  rich  material 
of  the  oral  law  according  to  subjects,  and  in  this  way  prepared  the 
great  Mishna  compilation  of  R.  Judah  Hanasi.  Besides  being  one  of 
the  most  distingued  teachers  of  the  law,  he  was  also  a  very  popular 
lecturer  (Agadist)  who  used  to  illustrate  his  lectures  by  interesting 
fables  and  parables.  Of  his  domestic  life  it  is  known  that  he  was 
married  to  Beruria  the  learned  daughter  of  the  celebrated  teacher 
and  martyr  R.  Chananiah  b.  Teradyon.  The  pious  resignation  which 
he  and  his  noble  wife  exhibited  at  the  sudden  death  of  their  two 
promising  sons  has  been  immortalized  by  a  popular  legend  in  the 
Midrash. 

2.  R.  Jehuda  h.  Ilaiia  generally  called  in  the  Mishna  simply 
R.  Jehuda.  After  having  received  instruction  in  the  law  from  his 
father  who  had  been  a  disciple  of  R.  Eliezer  b.  Hyrkanos,  he  attended 
the  lectures  of  R.  Tarphon  and  became  then  one  of  the  distinguished 
disciples  of  R.  Akiba.  On  account  of  his  great  eloquence  he  is  called 
D-llQl^n  ^ai  "The  first  among  the  speakers".  Also  his  piety,  mod- 
esty and  prudence  are  highly  praised.  He  gained  a  modest  subsistence 
by  a  mechanical  trade,  in  accordance  with  his  favored  maxims:  "Labor 
honors  man",  and  "He  who  does  not  teach  his  son  a  trade,  teaches 
him,  as  it  were,  robbery".  Having  been  one  of  the  seven  disciples  who 
after  the  death  of  R.  Akiba  were  ordained  by  R.  Juda  b.  Baba  contrary 
to  the  Hadrianic  edict,  he  had  to  flee.  After  three  years  he  returned 
with  his  colleagues  to  Usha  and  became  one  of  the  prominent  mem- 
bers of  the  resuscitated  Sanhedrin.  The  patriarch  R.  Simon  ben  Gama- 
liel honored  him  greatly,  and  appointed  him  as  one  of  his  advisers. 
As  expounder  of  the  law  he  was  a  gre  it  authority,  and  is  very  often 
quoted  in  all  parts  of  the  Mishna  and  Baraitha.  His  legal  opinions 
generally  prevail,  when  differing  from  those  of  his  colleagues  R.  Meir 
and  R.  Simon.   To  him  is  also  ascribed  the  authorship  of  the  essential 


The  Authorities  of  the  Mtshi^a,  53 

part  of  the  Siphra.  (See  above  p.  19).  The  Agada  of  the  Talmud  records 
many  of  his  beautiful  sayings  which  characterize  him  not  only  as  a 
noble-hearted  teacher,  but  also  as  a  sound  and  clear-headed  interpreter 
of  Scriptures.  He,  for  instance,  denied  the  literal  meaning  of  the 
resurrection  of  the  dead  bones  spoken  of  in  Ezekiel  ch.  XXXVII,  but 
declared  it  to  be  merely  a  poetical  figure  for  Israel's  rejuvenation  (Talm 
Sanhedrin  72  b.). 

R.  Jehuda  had  two  learned  sons  who  flourished  as  teachers  in  the 
following  generation. 

3.  R.  Jose  h.  Chalafta,  in  the  Mishna  called  simply  R.  Jose,  was 
from  Sepphoris  where  already  his  learned  father  had  established  a 
school.  Though  by  trade  a  tanner,  he  became  one  of  the  most  disting- 
uished teachers  of  his  time.  He  was  a  disciple  of  R.  Akiba  and  of 
R.  Tarphon.  Line  his  colleagues  he  was  ordained  by  R.  Juda  b.  Baba 
and,  on  this  account,  had  to  flee  to  the  south  of  Palestine,  whence  he 
later  on  returned  with  them  to  Usha.  For  having  kept  silent,  when 
in  his  presence  R.  Simon  made  a  slighting  remark  against  the  Roman 
government,  he  was  banished  to  Asia  Minor.  When  permitted  to 
return,  he  settled  in  his  native  city  Sepphoris  where  he  died  in  a  high 
age.  Besides  being  a  great  authority  in  the  law,  whose  opinions  prevail 
against  those  of  his  colleagues  R.  Meir,  R.  Jehuda  and  R.  Simon,  he 
was  an  historian  to  whom  the  authorship  of  the  chronological  book 
Seder  Olam  is  ascribed. 

4.  R.  Simon  b.  Jochai  from  Galilee,  in  the  Mishna  called  simply  R. 
Simon,  was  likewise  one  of  the  most  distinguished  disciples  of  R. 
Akiba  whose  lectures  he  attended  during  thirteen  years.  "Be  satisfied 
that  I  and  thy  creator  know  thy  powers",  were  the  words  with  which 
this  teacher  comforted  him,  when  he  felt  somewhat  slighted  on 
account  of  a  certain  preference  given  to  his  younger  colleague  R.  Meir. 
He  shared  the  fate  of  his  colleagues  in  being  c-ompelled  to  flee  after 
ordination.  Afterwards,  he  joined  them  at  the  new  seat  of  the 
Sanhedrin  in  Usha.  On  a  certain  occasion  he  gave  vent  to  his  bitter 
feeling  against  the  Romans,  which  was  reported  to  the  Roman  governor 
who  condemned  him  to  death.  He,  however,  escaped  this  fate  by 
concealing  himsrlf  in  a  cave  where  he  is  said  to  have  remained  for 
several  years  together  with  his  son,  engaged  in  the  study  of  the  law, 
and  subsisting  on  the  fruit  of  the  carob-trees  which  abounded  there 
in  the  neighborhood.     In  the  meantime  political    affairs  had  taken  a 


34  HiSTOIlICAL  AND  LITERARY  IXTRODUCTION. 

favorable  turn  so  that  he  had  no  longer  to  fear  any  persecution;  he  left 
his  hiding  place  and  reopened  his  academy  at  TeTcoa,  in  Galilee,  where 
a  circle  of  disciples  gathered  around  him.  }Ie  survived  all  his  col- 
leagues, and  in  his  old  age  was  delegated  to  Rome,  where  he  succeeded 
in  obtaining  from  the  emperor  (Marcus  Aurelius)  the  repeal  of  some 
edicts  against  the  Jewish  religion. 

In  the  interpretation  of  the  law,  R.  Simon  departed  from  the 
method  of  i\is  teacher  R.  Akiba,  as  he  inclined  to  the  view  of  R. 
Islmiael  that  *'the  Thora  speaks  the  common  language  of  man",  and 
consequently  regarded  logical  reasoning  as  the  proper  starting  point 
for  legal  deductions,  instead  of  pleonastic  words,  syllables  and  letters. 
In  accordance  with  this  sound  principle,  he  tried  to  investigate  the 
evident  motive  of  different  biblical  laws,  and  to  make  conclusions 
therefrom  for  their  proper  application.  ^  In  regard  to  treating  and 
arranging  the  oral  law,  however,  he  followed  the  method  of  R.  Akiba 
in  subsuming  various  provisions  under  guiding  rules  and  principles. 
R.  Simon  is  regarded  as  the  author  of  the  Siphre,  though  that  work  in 
its  present  shape  shows  many  additions  by  the  hands  of  later  authorities. 
(See  above  p.  20). 

5.  R.  Elazar  b.  Shamua,  in  the  Mishna  simply  R.  Elazar,  was 
among  those  of  R.  Akiba' s  disciples  who  in  consequence  of  the  Hadrian 
edicts  went  to  the  South,  whence  he  went  to  Nisibis.  He  does  not, 
however,  appear  to  have  joined  his  colleagues  when  they  gathered 
again  at  Llsha.  He  is  regarded  as  a  great  authority  in  the  law.  The 
place  of  his  academy  is  not  known,  but  it  is  stated  that  his  school  was 
always  overcro\A  ded  by  disciples  eager  to  hear  his  learned  lectures. 
Among  his  disciples  was  also  the  later  patriarch  R.  Jehuda.  On  a 
journey,  he  visited  his  former  colleague  R.  Meir  at  Ardiscos.  in  Asia 
Minor,  and  with  him  had  discussions  on  important  questions  of  the 
law  which  are  recorded  in  the  Mishna  and  Baraitha. 

6.  R.  Jochanan  the  Sandelar  had  this  surname  probably  from 
his  trade  in  sandals.  Born  in  Alexandria  in  Egypt,  he  came  to  Palestine 
to  attend  the  lectures  of  R.  Akiba,  and  was  so  faithful  a  disciple  that 
he  visited  this  teacher  even  in  prison,  in  order  to  receive  instruction 
from  him.  His  legal  opinions  are  occasionaly  recorded  in  the  Mishna 
as  well  as  in  the  Tosephta  and  Baraitha. 


>    See  Talm.  B.-  Metzda  115  a  and  Sanhedrin  21  a. 


The  Authorities  of  the  Mishxa.  35 

7.  R.  Elazar  (or  Eliezer)  b.  Jdcob  was  a  disciple  of  K.  Akiba  and 
later  a  member  of  the  Saiihedrin  in  Uslia.  This  teacher  must  not  be 
confounded  with  a  former  teacher  by  that  name  who  flourished  in  the 
second  generation  (See  above  p.  26 j. 

8.  R.  Nechemia  belonged  to  the  la§t  disciples  of  R.  Akiba  and  was 
an  authority  especially  in  the  sacrificial  law  and  in  the  laws  concerning 
levitical  purification.  His  controversies  are  mostly  with  R.  Juda  b. 
Ilai.  He  is  said  to  have  compiled  a  Mishna  -  collection  which  was 
embodied  in  the  Tose])hta. 

9.  R.  Joshua  h.  Korcha  is  supposed  by  some  to  have  been  a  son 
of  R.  Akiba  who,  on  one  occasion,  is  called  by  such  a  surname  (meaning 
the  bald  headj  ;  but  this  supposition  is  very  improbable,  for  it  would 
be  strange  that  the  son  of  so  illubtrious  a  man  should  not  rather  have 
been  called  by  his  father's  proper  name,  and  that  he  should  never  have 
alluded  to  his  celebrated  parent  or  to  any  of  his  teachings.  * 

R.  Joshua  b.  K.  belonged  to  the  authorities  of  this  generation, 
though  only  a  few  of  his  opinions  are  recorded  in  the  Mishna. 

10.  R.  Simon  h.  Oanialiel  was  the  son  and  successor  of  the 
patriarch  (Gamaliel  II  of  Jabne.  In  his  youth,  he  witnessed  the  fall  of 
Bethar,  and  escaped  the  threatened  arrest  by  flight.  After  the  death 
of  the  emperor  Hadrian,  he  returned  to  Jabne  where  he  in  connection 
with  some  teachers,  reopened  an  academy,  and  assumed  the  hereditary 
dignity  of  a  patriarch.  As  the  returning  disciples  of  R.  Akiba,  who  were 
the  leading  teachers  of  that  generation,  preferred/Usha  as  the  seat  of  the 
new  Sanhedrin,  R.  Simon  was  obliged  to  transfer  his  academy  to  that 
city,  and  appointed  R.  Nathan  as  Ab  Beth-din  (vice-president)  and  R. 
Meir  as  Chacham  (advising  sage,  or  speaker).  Both  of  these  two  officers 
Lad  to  retire  however,  when  found  planning  his  deposal  on  account  of 
some  marks  of  distinction  introduced  in  order  to  raise  the  patiiachal 
dignity.  He  did  not  enjoy  the  privilege  of  his  predecessors  to  be  titled 
Rabhan  (our  teacher),  but  like  the  other  teacliers,  he  was  simply  called 
Rabbi  (my  teacher)  ^probably  because  many  of  his  contemporaries  were 


»  That  R.  Akiba  had  a  son  by  the  name  of  R.  Joshua  is  stated  in 
aBaraitha  (Pesachim  112a  and  Shebdotli  6a);  but  the  identity  of  this 
son  witli  R.  Joshua  b.  Korcha  is  conclusively  disproved  by  the  Tosapli- 
ist  Rabenu    Tarn  in  his  remarks  on  Sabbath  15Ua  and  B   Bathra  113a, 

^  Tbtre  are,  however,  some  passages  in  the  Mishna  and  Gemara 
in  which  he  is  called  Rabban,  as  Gittin  74a;  B.  Bathra  113a;  Arachin 
28a. 


33  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

superior  to  him  in  learning.  Still,  his  legal  opinions,  which  are  fre- 
quently quoted  in  the  Mishna  and  Baraitha,  give  evidence  that  he  waa 
a  man  of  considerable  learning  and  of  sound  and  clear  judgment  as 
well  as  of  noble  principles.  He  introduced  several  legal  provisions  for 
the  protection  of  the  rights  of  women  and  slaves  and  for  the  general 
welfare  of  the  community.  All  his  opinions  expressed  in  the  Mishna, 
with  the  exception  of  only  three  cases,  are  regarded  by  later  teachers 
as  authoritative  (Halacha).  His  discussions  recorded  in  the  Mishna  and 
Baraitha  are  mostly  held  with  his  celebrated  son  R.  J  ehuda  Hanasi.  R. 
Simon  b.  Gamaliel  appears  to  have  been  acquainted  also  with  the  Greek 
language  and  sciences. 

Of  other  authorities  belonging  to  this  generation,  we  have  to 
mention:  Ahha  Saul,  R.  Elazar  b.Zadok.  and  especially  R.  Ishmael 
the  son  of  R.  Jochanan  b.  Broka. 

Apart  from  the  great  circle  of  teachers  mentioned  abo^e,  the 
disciples  of  R.  Ishmael  b.  Elisha  formed  a  school  in  the  extreme  South 
of  Ju Jea  (Daiom)  where  they  continued  the  methods  of  their  teacher. 
Of  this  separate  school,  called  Debe  R.  Ishmael,  only  two  members  are 
mentioned  by  name:   R.  Josiah  and  R.  Jonathan. 

The  Fifth  Generation  of  Tanaim. 
§  1^. 
This   generation  extends   from  the  death  of  R.  Simon  b. 
Gamaliel  II  to  the  death  of  R.  Jehuda  Hanasi  (from  165  to 
about   200.) 

The  following  are  the  most  prominent  teachers  of  this  gen- 
eration. 

1.  R.  Nathan  (the  Babylonian). 

2.  Symmachos. 

3.  R.  Jehuda   Hanasi   (the  patriarcli),  called  simply 
Rabbi. 

4.  R.  Jose  b.  Juda. 

5.  R.  Elazar  b.  Simon. 

6.  R.  Simon  b.  Elazar. 
Characteristics  and  Biographical  Sketches. 

1.  R.  Nathan  was  the  son  of  one  of  the  exilarchs  in  Babylon,  and 
probably    received  his  education  in  his   native   country.    For  some 


The  Authorities  of  the  M«shna.  37 

unknown  reasons  he  emigrated  to  Judea,  and  on  account  of  his  great 
learning  he  was  appointed  by  the  patriarch  R.  Simon  b.  Gamaliel 
to  the  dignity  of  Ab-Beth-din  (chief  Justice  or  vice-president)  in  the 
Sanhedrin  of  Usha.  He  had  to  retire  from  this  oflfice  because  of  his 
and  R.  Meir's  dissension  with  the  patriarch,  but  was  soon  reinstated 
and  became  reconciled  with  the  Synhedrial  president  who  held  him  in 
high  esteem.  Also  the  succeeding  patriarch  R.  Jehuda,  with  whom  he 
had  many  discussions  on  questions  of  the  law,  speaks  of  him  with  great 
respect.  R.Nathan  was  not  only  an  authorityin  the  rabbinical  law,  espec- 
ially in  jurisprudence, but  appears  also  to  have  been  well  versed  in  mathe- 
matics, astronomy  and  other  sciences.  To  him  is  ascribed  the  authorship 
of  Aboth  de  R.  Nathan,  which  is  a  kind  of  Toseplita  to  Pirke  Aboth. 

3.  Symmachos  was  a  prominent  disciple  of  R.  Meir  and  disting- 
uished for  his  great  dialectical  powers.  After  the  death  of  his  teacher, 
he  as  well  as  other  disciples  of  R.  Meir  were  excluded  from  the  academy 
of  R.  Jehuda  Hanasi,  as  they  were  charged  of  indulging  in  sophistical 
disputations  in  order  to  display  their  dialectical  sagacity,  instead  of 
seeking  after  truth.  Nevertheless  the  Mishna  as  well  as  the  Tosephta 
makes  mention  of  the  opinions  of  Symmachos.  His  renown  lay  in  the 
rabbinical  jurisprudence  in  which  he  laid  down  certain  principles  often 
referred  to  in  the  Talmud. 

3.  B.  Jehuda  {Judo)  Hanasi,  by  way  of  eminence  simply  called 
Rabbi,  was  a  son  of  the  patriarch  R.  Simon  b.  Gamaliel  II,  and  is  said 
to  have  been  born  on  the  same  day  when  R.  Akiba  was  executed.  His 
principal  teachers  were  R.  Simon  b.  Jochai  and  R.  Elazar  b.  Shamua 
under  whose  guidance  his  intellectual  capacity  and  splendid  talents 
early  developed.  Beside  his  immense  knowledge  of  the  whole  range 
of  the  traditional  law,  he  had  a  liberal  education  in  secular  branches  and 
was  especially  acquainted  with  the  Greek  language  which  he  preferred 
to  the  Syriac,  the  popular  language  of  Palestine  at  that  time.  After 
the  death  of  his  father  he  succeeded  him  in  the  dignity  of  patriarch* 
and  became  the  chief  authority  eclipsing  all  other  teachers  of  that 
generation.  Though  blessed  with  great  riches,  he  preferred  to  live  in 
a  simple  style  and  applied  his  wealth  to  the  maintenance  of  his  numer- 
ous pupils  and  to  charitable  works.  The  seat  of  his  academy  was  first 
at  Beth-Shearim,  afterward  at  Sepphoris  and  also  at  Tiberias.  Among 
his  most  distinguished  disciples  were:  R.  Chiya;  (Simon)  bar  Kappara; 


S8  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

Levi  bar  Sissi;  R.  Abba  Areca,  later  called  Rab;  Mar  Samuel,  and  many- 
others.  He  is  said  to  have  been  in  a  friendly  relation  with  one  of  the 
Roman  emperors,  either  Marcus  Aurelius  or,  more  probably,  Lucius 
Verus  Antoninus.  By  virtue  of  his  authority  R.  Jehuda  abolished 
several  customs  and  ceremonies  which  though  sanctified  by  age  had 
become  impracticable  through  the  change  of  limes  and  circumstances. 
His  most  meritorious  work  by  which  he  erected  for  himself  a  monu. 
ment  of  enduring  fame  was  the  completion  of  the  Mishna  compilation 
which  henceforth  became  the  authoritative  code  of  the  traditional  law 
and  superseded  all  similar  compilations  made  by  former  teachers. 

4.  R.  Jose  hen  Juda  (b.  Ilai)  belonged  to  the  great  teachers  of 
that  generation  and  was  a  friend  of  R.  Jehuda  Hanasi.  His  legal 
opinions  are  frequently  recorded  in  the  Mishna  as  well  as  in  the 
Tosephta. 

5.  E.  Elazar  h,  Simon  (b.  Jochai)  was  a  disciple  of  R.  Simon  b. 
Gamaliel  and  of  R.  Joshua  b.  Korcha.  Although  an  authority  in  the 
rabbinical  law  to  whom  even  the  patriarch  sometimes  yielded,  he 
incurred  the  severest  censure  of  his  colleagues  for  having,  on  a  certain 
occasion,  lent  his  assistance  to  the  Romans  in  persecuting  some  Jewish 
freebooters. 

6.  R.  Simon  h.  Elazar  (probably  E.  b.  Shamua)  was  a  disciple  of 
R.  Meir  whose  opinions  he  often  quotes.  He  established  several  import- 
ant principles,  especially  in  the  civil  law. 


The  Authorities  of  the  Mishna.  8^ 

The  sixth  Generation  of  Tanaim. 

§18. 

To  this  generation  belong  the  younger  contemporaries  and 
disciples  of  R.  Juda  Hanasi.  They  are  not  mentioned  in  the 
Mishna,  but  in  the  Tosephta  and  Baraitha,  and  are  therefore 
termed  semi-Tanaim,  who  form  a  connecting  link  between  the 
period  of  Tanaim  and  that  of  the  Amoraim.     Their  names  are: 


1. 

Plimo. 

2. 

Ise  b.  Juda. 

3. 

R.  Elazar  b.  Jose. 

4. 

R.  Ishmael  bar  Jose, 

6. 

R.  Juda  b.  Lakish. 

6. 

R.  Chiya. 

1. 

R.  Acha. 

8. 

R.  Abba  (Areca). 

The  most  prominent  among  these  semi-Tanaim  were  R.  Chiya  and 
R.  Abba  (Areca). 

1.  R.  Chiya  (bar  Abba)  the  elder,  which  epithet  is  to  distinguish 
him  from  a  later  Amora  by  the  same  mame,  was  a  Babylonian  who 
came  at  an  already  advanced  age  to  Palestine  where  he  became  the 
most  distinguished  disciple  and  friend  of  R.  Jehuda  Hanasi.  He  and 
his  disciple  R.  Oshaya  (or  Hoshaya)  are  regarded  as  the  principal  authors 
or  compilers  of  the  Tosephta  (see  above  p.  17). 

2.  R.  Abba  (Areca)  a  nephew  of  R.  Chiya  was  likewise  a  Babyl- 
onian and  a  disciple  of  R.  Jehuda  Hanasi,  after  whose  death  he 
returned  to  his  native  country  where,  under  the  historical  name  of  Rab, 
he  became  the  principal  Amora.     (See  the  following  chapter). 

Of  other  distinguished  teachers  flourishing  in  this  generation  and 
in  the  beginning  of  the  period  of  the  Amoraim  we  have  to  mention 
especially  R.  Janai  (the  elder)  and  R.  Jonathan  (the  elder).  The 
former  lived  in  Sepphoris  and  was  one  of  the  teachers  of  R.  Jochanan 
bar  Naphachi,  the  greatest  among  the  Palestinian  Amoraim. 


CHAPTER  lY. 

THE  EXPOUNDERS  OF  THE  MISHNA. 

§  19. 

As  the  Mishna  compilation  of  R.  Jehuda  Hanasi  became 
the  authoritative  code  of  the  oral  Law,  the  activity  of  the 
teachers  was  principally  devoted  to  expounding  this  code.  This 
was  done  as  well  in  the  academies  of  Tiberias^  Sepphorts,  Caesarea 
in  Palestine,  as  in  those  of  Nahardea^  Sura,  and  later  of  Pumba- 
ditha  and  some  other  seats  of  learning  in  Babylonia.  The  main 
object  of  the  lectures  and  discussions  in  those  academies  was  to 
interpret  the  often  very  brief  and  concise  expression  of  the 
Mishna,  to  investigate  its  reasons  and  sources,  to  reconcile  seem- 
ing contradictions,  to  compare  its  canons  with  those  of  the  Ba- 
raithoth.and  to  apply  its  decisions  and  established  principles  to 
new  cases  not  yet  provided  for.  The  teachers  who  were  engaged 
in  this  work  which  finally  became  embodied  in  the  Gemara,  are 
called  Amoraim^  meaning  speakers,  interpreters,  expounders.  ^ 
They  were  not  as  independent  in  their  legal  opinions  and  de- 
cisions as  their  predecessors,  the  Tanaim  and  semi-Tanaim,  as 
they  had  not  the  authority  to  contradict  Halachoth  and  prin- 
ciples accepted  in  the  Mishna  or  Baraitha.  The  Palestinian 
Amoraim  having  generally  been  ordained  by  the  Nasi  had  the 


*  In  a  more  restricted  meaning  the  term  ^7m)ra(from  *iDX  to  say, 
to  speak)  signifies  the  same  as  Methurgeman  (pjn^riD  the  interpreter), 
that  is  the  ofiBicer  in  the  academies  who,  standing  at  the  side  of  the 
lecturer  or  presiding  teacher,  had  to  announce  loudly  and  explain  to 
the  large  assembly  what  the  teacher  just  expressed  briefly  and  in  a 
low  voice. 

The  term  Tana,  which  generally  applies  only  to  the  teachers  men- 
tioned in  the  Mishna  and  Baraitha,  is  in  the  period  of  Amoraim  some- 
times used  also  to  signify  one  whose  special  business  it  was  to  recite  the 
memorized  Baraithoth  to  the  expounding  teachers.  In  this  sense  the 
term  is  to  be  imderstood  m  the  phrase:  ^OI^jST  n^D\>  fcOfl  ^Jn  Betza  28b. 
andoitea. 


The  Expounders  of  the  Mishna.  41 

title  otRabbi^  while  the  Babylonian  teachers  of  that  period  had 
only  the  title  of  Rab  or  of  Mar, 

The  period  of  Amor  aim  extends  from  the  death  of  R.  Jehuda 
Hanasi  to  the  compilation  of  the  Babylonian  Talmud,  that  is, 
jfrom  the  beginning  of  the  third  to  the  end  of  the  fifth  century. 
This  period  has  been  divided  by  some  into  six,  by  others  into 
seven  minor  periods  or  generations  which  are  determined  by  the 
beginning  and  the  end  of  the  activity  of  the  most  prominent 
teachers  flourishing  during  that  time. 

The  number  of  Amoraim  who  are  mentioned  in  the  Talmud 
amounts  to  several  hundreds.  The  most  distinguished  among 
them,  especially  those  who  presided  over  the  great  academies 
are  contained  in  the  following  chronological  tables  of  the  six 
generations  of  Amoraim.* 

The  first  Generation  of  Amoraim. 
§  20. 

B.     Babylonian  (219-25T). 

1.  Abba  Areca,  called  simply 
Rab. 

2.  (Mar)  Samuel. 


A.     Palestinian  (219-2T9). 

1.  R.  Chanina  bar  Chama. 

2.  R.  Jochanan  (bar  Napacha) 
8.  R.  Simon  ben  Lakish  (Resh 

Lakish). 
4.  R.  Joshua  ben  Levi. 


Biographical  Sketches. 
A.     Palestinian  Amoraim. 

During  this  generation  R.  Gamaliel  III  and  R.  Judah  II  were  suo- 
ceBsively  the  patriarchs. 

1.  R.  Chanina  bar  Chama  (born  about  180,  died  260)  was  a  disciple 
of  R.  Jehuda  Hanasi  whose  son  and  successor  R.  GamaUel  III  bestowed 


'  Some  scholars  count  the  semi-Tanaim  as  the  first  generation, 
and  have  consequently  seven  instead  of  six  generations.  The  period  of 
Palestinian  Amoraim  being  much  shorter  than  that  of  the  Babv  Ionian, 
ends  with  the  third  generation  of  the  latter.  Frankelinhis  ''DbkJ''n*'n  NIIO. 
treating  especially  of  the  Palestinian  Amoraim,  divides  them  also  into 
six  generations. 


42  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

on  him  the  title  of  Rabbi.  He  then  presided  over  his  own  academy  in 
Sepi  horis  and  stood  in  high  regard  on  account  of  his  learning,  modesty 
and  piety.  As  teacher  he  was  very  conservative,  transmitting  that 
only  which  he  had  received  by  tradition,  without  ever  allowing  himsCif 
an  independent  decision.  Of  his  prominent  contemporaries  are:  R. 
Ephes  who  reopened  a  school  at  Lydda  in  South  Judea;  Levi  h.  Sissi 
(called  simply  Levi)  who  though  not  presiding  over  an  academy,  was  a 
distinguished  teacher,and  later  emigrated  to  Babylonia;  further  ChizMa 
who  was  a  son  of  R.  Chiya  the  Elder  and  whose  teachings  are  fre- 
quently quoted  in  the  Talmud.  This  Chizkia  who  had  not  the  title  of 
Rabbi  must  not  be  mistaken  for  a  R.  Chizkia  who  belonged  to  the  third 
generation. 

2 .  R.  Joclianan  bar  Napacha,  in  general  called  simply  R.  Jochanan 
(born  about  199;  d.  279),  was  in  his  early  youth  a  disciple  of  R.  Jehuda 
Hanasi,  later  of  R.  Oshaya  in  Caesarea,  also  of  R.  Janai  and  especially 
of  R.  Chanina  b.  Chama.  He  then  founded  his  own  academy  in  Tiberias 
which  henceforth  became  the  principal  seat  of  learning  in  the  holy 
land.  By  his  great  mental  powers  he  excelled  all  his  contempc;raries 
and  is  regarded  the  chief  Amora  of  Palestine.  In  expounding  the 
Mishna  he  introduced  an  analytical  method,  and  laid  down  certain 
rules  for  the  final  decision  in  such  cases  in  which  the  Tanaim  expressed 
opposite  opinions.  His  legal  teachings  ethical  aphorisms,  and  exegetical 
remarks,  transmitted  by  his  numerous  disciples,  form  the  principal 
elements  of  the  Gemara.  He  is  supposed  to  have  laid  the  foundation 
of  the  Palestinian  Talmud,  though,  in  its  present  shape,  this  work 
can  not  have  been  compiled  before  at  least  one  century  after  R.  Jocha- 
nan's  death.  ^ 

3.  R.  Simon  b.Lakish,  whose  name  is  generally  abbreviated  in  Resh 
Lakish,  was  a  man  who  combined  great  physical  strength  with  a  noble 
heart  and  a  powerful  mind.  It  is  said,  that  in  his  youth,  he  was  com- 
pelled by  circumstances  to  gain  his  livelihood  as  a  gladiator  or  soldier 


^  As  to  further  characteristics  of  this  and  the  other  promment 
Amoraim,  the  folloving  works  may  be  consulted:  Graetz,  History  of 
the  Jews,  vol.  IV;  Z.  Frankel,  Mebo;  I.  H.  Weiss,  Dor  Dor,  vol  III; 
I.  Hamburger,  Real  Encyclopadie,  vol  II.  Besides,  J,  Fiirst,  "Kultur 
and  Literaturgeschichte  der  Juden  in  Asien",  which  treats  especially 
of  the  Babylonian  academies  and  teachers  during  the  period  of  the 
Amoraim. 


The  Expounders  of  the  Mtshna.  43 

until  making  the  acquaintance  of  R.  Jochanan  who  gained  him  for  the 
study  of  the  law  and  gave  him  his  sister  in  marriage.  Having  devel- 
oped extraordinary  mental  and  dialectical  powers,  he  became  R.  Jocha- 
nan's  most  distinguished  friend  and  colleague.  In  tho  interpretation 
of  the  Mishna  and  in  legal  questions  they  differed  however  very  often, 
and  their  numerous  controversies  are  reported  in  the  Babylonian  Tal- 
mud as  well  as  in  the  Palestinian.  Also  in  his  Agadic  teachings,  Resh 
Lakish  was  original  and  advanced  some  very  rational  views. 

4.  R.  Joshua  b.  Levi  presided  over  an  academy  in  Lydda.  He  is 
regarded  as  a  great  authority  in  the  law,  and  his  decisions  prevail 
even  in  cases  where  his  celebrated  contemporaries,  11.  Jochanan  and 
Resh  Lakish  differ  from  him.  Though  himself  a  prolific  Agadist,  he 
disapproved  the  vagaries  of  the  Agada  and  objected  to  their  being 
written  down  in  books.  The  circunstance  that,  on  a  certain  occasion, 
his  prayer  for  rain  proved  to  be  efficient,  probably  gave  rise  to  the 
mystic  legends  with  which  the  fancy  of  later  generation  tried  to 
illustrate  his  great  piety. 

To  other  celebrities  flourishing  in  this  generations  belongs  R. 
Simlai  of  Lydda  who  later  settled  in  Nahardea.  He  was  reputed  less 
as  teacher  of  the  Halacha  than  for  his  ingenious  and  lucid  method  of 
treating  the  Agada. 

B.     Babylonian  Amoraim. 

1.  Ahba  Areca  (or  Aricha)  was  the  real  name  of  the  chief  Babyl- 
onian Amora  who,  by  way  of  eminence,  is  generally  called  Rub  (the 
teacher).  He  was  born  about  175  and  died  247.  As  an  orphaned  youth 
he  went  to  his  uncle  the  celebrated  R.  Chiya  in  Palestine  to  finish  his 
studies  in  the  academy  of  R.  Jehuda  Hanasi.  The  mental  abilities 
which  he  displayed  soon  attracted  general  attention.  After  the  death 
of  R.  Jehuda,  Abba  returned  to  his  native  country  and  in  the  year 
219  founded  the  academy  in  Sura  where  1200  pupils  flocked  around 
him  from  all  parts  of  Babylonia.  His  authority  was  recognized  even  by 
the  most  celebrated  teachers  in  Palestine.  Being  regarded  as  one  of 
the  semi-Tj.naim  he  ventured  in  some  instances  even  to  dispute  some 
opinions  accepted  in  the  Mishm,  a  privilege  otherwise  not  accorded  to 
any  of  the  Amoraim.  *  Most  of  his  decisions,  especially  in  ritual 
questions,    obtained   legal  sanction,  but  in  the  civil  law    his  friend 


*    J^bsT  Nin  KJn  21,  Erubin  50b  and  often. 


4i  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

Samuol  in  Na'aardea  was  his  superior  * .  Over  one  hundred  of  his 
numerous  disciples,  who  transmitted  his  teachings  and  decisions  to 
later  generations  are  m3ntioned  in  the  Talmud  by  their  names. 

2.  Samuel,  or  Mar  Samuel,  was  born  about  180  in  Nahardea,  died 
there  257.  His  father,  Abba  bar  Abba,  and  Levi  b.  Sissi  were  liis  first 
teachers.  Like  Rib  he  went  to  Pal  estine  and  became  a  disciple  of 
Rabbi  JehudaHanasi  from  whom,  however,  he  could  not  obt  in  the 
ordination.  After  his  return  to  Nahardea,  he  succeeded  R.  Shela  in 
the  dignity  of  pre^^ident  of  the  academy  (Resh-Sidra)  in  that  oity. 
Besides  the  law,  he  cultivated  the  sciences  of  medicine  and  astronomy. 
As  Amora  he  developed  especially  the  rabbinical  jurisprudence  in 
which  he  was  regarded  as  the  greatest  authority  '.  Among  other  imi)ort- 
ant  principles  established  by  him  is  that  of  ^'Dina  (TmalGhutha  Dina", 
that  is,  the^civil  law  of  the  government  is  as  valid  for  the  Jews  as  their 
own  law.  The  most  friendly  and  brotherly  relation  prevailed  between 
Samuel  and  Rab,  although  they  often  differed  in  questions  of  the 
aw.  After  Rab's  death  (247),  his  disciples  recognized  Samuel  as  the 
highest  religious  authority  of  Babylonia.  He  died  about  ten  years 
later,  leaving  behind  numerous  disciples,  several  of  whom  bf^came  the 
leading  teachers  in  the  following  generation. 

A  distinguished  contemporary  of  Samuel  was  Mar    Ukba,  at  first 
head  of  the  court  in  Kafri,  and  later  Exilarch  in  Nahara^. . 


»   pjnn  b.'^ioK'ai  niD-xa  ma  snaSn  Bechoroth  49b. 

•  Mar  Sam  1^1  made  also  a  compilation  of  Bara  ithoth  which  ii 
quoted  in  the  Talmud  by  the  phrase  ^XIDiJ'  '"21  XJn.  Betza  29a  and 
Moed  Katon  18b;  see  Eashi's  remark  to  the  first  mentioned  passage. 


The  Expounders  of  the  Misiina.  45 

The  second  Generation  of  Amoraim. 
§  21. 


A.     Palestinian  (279-320) 

1.  R.  Elazar  b.  Pedath. 

2.  R.  Ame. 

3.  R.  Assi. 

4.  R.  Chi3^a  bar  Abba. 

5.  Simon  bar  Abba. 

6.  R.  Abbahu. 

1.  R.  Zera  (Zeira). 


B.     Babylonian  (257-320). 

1.  Rab  Huna. 

2.  Rab  Juda  bar  Jecheskel. 

3.  Rab  Chisda  (or  Chasda). 

4.  Rab  Shesheth. 

5.  Rab  Nachman  b.  Jacob. 


Remarks  and  Biographical  Sketches. 
A.     Palestinian  Amoraim. 

The  patriarchate   during  this  generation  was  successively  in  the 
hands  of  R.  Gamaliel  IV  and  R.  Judah  III. 

1.  R.  Elazar  ben  Pedath,  generally  called  simply  R.  Elazar,  like 
the  Tana  R,  Elazar  (ben  Shamua)  for  whom  he  must  not  be  mistaken, 
was  a  native  of  Babylonia  and  a  disciple  and  later  an  associate  of  R. 
Jochanan  whom  he  survived.  He  enjoyed  great  authority  and  is  very 
often  quoted  in  the  Talmud. 

2  and  3.  R.  Ame  and  R.  Assi  were  likewise  Babylonians,  and 
distin^^uished  disciples  of  R.  Jochanan.  After  the  death  of  R.  Elazar 
they  became  the  heads  of  the  declining  academy  in  Tiberias.  They 
had  the  title  only  of  ,,  Judges,  or  the  Aaronites  of  the  Holy  Land"  and 
subordinated  themselves  to  the  growing  authority  of  the  teachers  in 
Babylonia.  Rabbi  Assi  is  not  to  be  confoundend  with  his  contempor- 
ary, the  Babylonian  Amora  Rab  Assi,  who  was  a  colleague  of  Rab 
Saphra  and  a  disciple  of  Rab  in  Sura.  * 

4  and  5.  R.  Chiya  bar  Abba  and  Simon  bar  Abba  were  probably 
brothers.  They  had  immigrated  from  Babylonia  and  became  disci 
pies  of  R.  Jochanan.  Both  were  distinguished  teachers,  but  very  poor. 
In  questions  of  the  law  they  were  inclined  to  rigorous  views. 

6.  R.  Abbahu  of  Caesarea,  disciple  of  R.  Jochanan,  friend  and 
colleague  of  R  Ame  and  R.  Assi,  was  a  man  of  great  wealth  and  of 
a  lib'.Tal    education.      He  had  a  thorough  knowledge    of    the    Groeic 


»    See  Tosaphoth  Chullin  19a. 


46  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

language,  and  favored  Greek  culture.  Being  held  in  high  esteem  by  the 
Roman  authorities,  he  had  great  political  influence.  He  seems  to  have 
had  frequent  controversies  with  the  teachers  of  Christianity  in 
Caesarea.  Besides  being  a  prominent  teacher  whose  legal  opinions  are 
quoted  in  all  parts  of  the  Palestinian  and  Babylonian  Talmud,  he  was  a 
very  popular  lecturer. 

7.  R.  Zeira  {or  Zero)  was  a  Babylonian  and  a  disciple  of  Rab  Juda  bar 
Jecheskel,  but  dissatisfied  with  the  hair  splitting  method  prevailing  in 
the  academies  of  his  native  country,  he  emigrated  to  Palestine  where 
he  attended  the  lectures  of  R.  Elazar  b.  Pedath  in  Tiberias,  and  tried, 
in  vain,  to  unlearn  his  former  method  of  study.  Having  been  ordained 
as  Rabbi,  he  became  one  of  the  authorities  in  Palestine  together  with 
R.  Ame,  R.  Assi  and  R.  Abbahu. 

B.  Babylonian  Amoraim. 

1.  Rab  Huna  (born  312,  died  297)  was  a  disciple  of  Rab,  whom, 
after  Mar  Samuel's  death,  he  succeeded  as  president  of  the  academy  in 
Sura.  In  this  office  he  was  active  for  forty  years.  He  employed  fifteen 
assistants  to  repeat  and  explain  his  lectures  to  his  800  disciples. 
Highly  revered  for  his  great  learning  and  his  noble  character, he  enjoyed 
an  undisputed  authority  to  which  even  the  Palestinian  teachers  R.  Ame 
and  R.  Assi  voluntarily  subordinated  themselves. 

2.  Rab  Juda  bar  Jecheskel,  generally  called  simply  R.  Juda 
(or  Jehuda),  was  a  disciple  of  Rab  and  also  of  Samuel.  The  latter 
teacher,  who.-e  peculiar  method  he  adopted  and  developed,  used  to 
characterize  him  by  the  epithet  ^^T^  "the  acute".  He  founded  the 
academy  in  Pumbaditha,  but  after  R.  Huna's  death  he  was  chosen  as 
his  successor  (Resli  Methibta)  at  Sura,  where  after  two  years  (299)  he 
died  in  an  advanced  age. 

3.  Rab  Chisda  (or  Chasda)  belonged  to  the  younger  disciples  of 
Rab  after  whose  death  he  attended  also  the  lectures  of  R.  Huna.  But 
from  the  latter  teacher  he  soon  separated  on  account  of  a  misunder- 
standing between  them  and  established  a  school  of  his  own.  At  the 
same  time,  he  was  one  of  the  Judges  in  Sura.  After  Rab  Juda's  death 
R.  Chisda,  though  already  above  80  years  old,  became  head  of  the 
academy  in  Sura  and  remained  in  this  office  for  about  ten  years 

4.  Rab  Shesheth,  a  disciple  of  Rab  and  Samuel,  was  member  of 
the  court  in  Nahardea.     After  the  destruction  of  that  city  he  went  to 


The  Expoundehs  of  the  Mishna.  4T 

Mechuza;  later  he  settled  in  Silhi  where  he  founded  an  academy. 
Being  blind,  he  had  to  vAy  upon  his  powerful  memory.  He  was 
R.  Chisda's  opponent  in  the  Halacha,  and  disapproved  the  hairsplitting 
dialectical  method  which  had  come  in  vogue  among  the  followers  of 
Rab  Juda  in  Pumbaditha. 

5.  Rab  Naehman  b.  Jacob,  called  simply  Rab  Nachman,  was  a 
prominent  disciple  of  Mar  Samuel.  By  his  father-in-law,  the  exilarch 
Abba  bar  Abulia,  he  was  appointed  chief  justice  in  Nahardea.  After 
Mar  Samuel's  death  he  succeeded  him  as  rector  of  the  academy  in  that 
city.  When  two  years  later  (259)  the  city  of  Naliardea  was  destroyed, 
R.  Nachman  settled  in  Shechan-Zib.  He  is  regarded  as  a  great 
authority  especially  in  the  rabbinical  jurisprudence  in  wliich  he 
established  many  important  principles.  Among  others,  he  originated 
the  rabbinical  oath  termed  ^^^^  nVlQ'^^  that  is,  the  purging  oath 
imposed  in  a  law  suit  on  the  claimee  even  in  cases  of  general  denial 
on  his  pcirt  ^DH  -I2"I3). 

or  o:her  teachers  belonging  to  this  generation  who,  though  not 
standing  at  the  head  of  the  leading  academies,  are  often  quoted  in 
the  Talmud,  the  following  must  be  noted: 

a.  Rabba  bar  bar  Chana  who  was  a  Babylonian  and  son  of  Abba 
bar  Chana.  After  having  attended  the  academy  of  R.  Joclianan  in 
Palestine,  he  returned  to  his  native  country  where  he  frequently 
reported  the  opinions  of  his  great  teacher.  He  is  also  noted  for  the 
many  allegorical  narratives  ascribed  to  him  in  the  Talmud. 

b.  Ulla  (b,  Ishmael)  was  a  Palestinian  who  frequently  travelled 
to  Babylonia  where  he  finally  settled  and  died.  Although  without  the 
title  of  Rabbi  or  Rab,  he  was  regarded  as  a  distinguished  teacher  whose 
opinions  and  reports  are  often  mentioned. 


48 


Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 


The  third  Generation  of  Amoraim. 
§  22. 


A.     Palestinian  (320-359). 

1.  R.  Jeremiah. 

2.  R.  Jonah. 

3.  R.  Jose. 


B.     Babylonian  (320-375). 

1.  Rabba  bar  Huna. 

2.  Rabba  bar  Nachmani. 

3.  Rab  Joseph  (bar  Chiya). 

4.  Abaye. 

5.  Raba. 

6.  Rab  Nachman  bar  Isaac. 
1,  Rab  Papa. 


Remarks  and  Biographical  Sketches. 
A.     Palestinian  Amoraim. 

The  patriarch  of  this  period  was  HiUel  II  who  introduced  the  fixed 
Jewish  calendar. 

In  consequence  of  the  persecutions  and  the  banishment  of  several 
religious  teachers  under  the  emperors  Constantin  and  Constantius,  the 
Palestinian  academies  entirely  decayed.  The  only  teachers  of  some 
prominence  are  the  following: 

1.  R.  Jeremiah  was  a  Babylonian  and  disciple  of  R.  Zeira  whom 
he  followed  to  Palestine.  In  his  younger  days,  when  still  in  his  native 
country,  he  indulged  in  propounding  puzzling  questions  of  trifling 
casuistry  by  which  he  probabJy  intended  to  ridicule  the  subtile  method 
prevaiUng  among  some  of  the  contemporary  teachers,  and  on  this 
account  he  was  expelled  from  the  academy.  In  the  holy  land  he  was 
more  appreciated  and  after  the  death  of  R.  Abbahu  and  R.  Zeira  was 
acknowledged  as  the  only  authority  in  that  country. 

2.  R.  Jonah  was  a  disciple  of  R.  Ila  (Hila)  and  of  R.  Jeremiah. 
His  opinions  are  frequently  quoted  especially  in  the  Palestinian  Tal- 
mud. 

3.  jB.  Jose  (bar  Zabda),  colleague  of  the  just  mentioned  R.  Jonah, 
was  one  of  the  last  rabbinical  authorities  in  Palestine. 

It  is  probable  that  the  compilation  of  the  Palestinian  Talmud 
was  accomplished  about  that  time,  though  it  cannot  be  stated  by  whom. 


The  Expounders  of  the  Mishna.  49 

B.  Babylonian  Amoraim. 

1.  Rabha  (or  Rab  Abba)  bar  Hiuia  was  not,  as  erroneously- 
supposed  by  some,  the  son  of  the  exilarch  Huna  Mari,  but  of  Rab 
Huna,  the  disciple  and  successor  of  Rab.  After  the  death  of  K.  Chisda 
(309)  he  succeeded  him  in  the  dignity  of  president  of  the  academy  in 
Sura.  Under  his  presidency,  lasting  13  years,  this  academy  was 
eclipsed  by  that  of  Pumbaditha,  and  after  his  death  it  remained  deserted 
for  about  fifty  years  until  Rab  Ashe  restored  it  to  its  former  glory. 

2.  Rahha  bar  Nachmani,  in  the  Talmud  called  simply  Rabba,  was 
born  270  and  died  330.  He  was  a  disciple  of  Rab  Huna,  Rab  Juda  and 
Rab  Chisda,  and  displayed  from  his  youth  great  dialectical  powers  on 
account  of  which  he  was  characterized  as  "the  uprooter  of  mountains". 
Selected  as  head  of  the  academy  of  Pumbaditha,  he  attracted  large 
crowds  of  hearers  by  his  ingenious  method  of  teaching.  In  his  lectures 
which  commented  on  all  parts  of  the  Mishna  he  investigated  the 
reason  of  the  laws  and  made  therefrom  logical  deductions.  Besides, 
he  tried  to  reconcile  seeming  differences  between  the  Mishna,  the 
Baraithoth  and  the  traditional  teachings  of  later  authorities.  He  also 
liked  to  propound  puzzling  problems  of  the  law  in  order  to  test  and 
sharpen  the  mental  powers  of  his  disciples.  A  charge  having  been 
made  against  him  by  the  Persian  government  that  many  of  his 
numerous  hearers  attended  his  lectures  in  order  to  evade  the  poll-tax, 
he  fled  from  Pumbaditha  and  died  in  solitude. 

3.  Rab  Joseph  (bar  Chiya)  was  a  disciple  of  Rab  Juda  and  Rab 
Shesheth,  and  succeeded  his  friend  Rabba  in  the  dignity  of  president 
of  the  academy  in  Pumbadita,  after  having  once  before  been  elected 
for  this  office  which  he  declined  in  favor  of  Rabba.  On  account  of  his 
thorough  knowledge  of  the  sources  of  the  Law,  to  which  he  attached 
more  importance  than  to  ingenious  deductions,  he  was  called  Sinai. 
Besides  being  a  great  authority  in  the  rabbinical  law,  he  devoted 
himself  to  the  Targum  of  the  Bible,  especially  of  the  prophetical  books. 
In  his  old  age  he  became  blind.  He  died  in  the  year  333  after  ha\  ing 
presided  over  the  academy  of  Pumbaditha  only  for  three  years. 

4.  Abaye,  surnamed  Nachmani  {h.  280.  d.  338),  was  a  son  Kaylil 
and  a  pupil  of  his  uncle  Rabba  bar  Nachmani,  and  of  Rab  Joseph.  He 
was  highly  esteemed  not  only  for  his  profound  knowledge  of  the  law 
and  his  mastership  in  Talmudical  dialectics,  but  also  for  his  integrity 


50  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

and  gentleness.  After  Rab  Joseph's  death  he  was  selected  as  head  of 
the  academy  in  Pumbaditha,  but  under  his  administration  which  lasted 
about  five  years,  the  number  of  hearers  in  that  academy  decreased 
considerably,  as  his  more  talented  colleague  Rdba  had  founded  a  new 
academy  in  Machuza  which  attracted  greater  crowds  of  pupils. 
Under  these  two  Amoraim  the  dialectical  method  of  the  Babylonian 
teachers  reached  the  highest  development.  Their  discussions,  which 
mostly  concern  some  very  nice  distinctions  in  the  interpretation  of  the 
Mishna  in  order  to  reconcile  conflicting  passages,  fill  the  pages  of  the 
Talmud.  ^  In  their  differences  concerning  more  practical  questions 
the  opinion  of  Raba  generally  prevails,  so  that  later  authorities 
pointed  out  only  six  cases  in  which  the  decision  of  Abaye  was  to  be 
adopted  against  that  of  his  rival.  ^ 

5.  Raba  was  the  son  of  Joseph  b.  Chama  in  Machuza.  He  was 
born  299  and  died  353.  In  his  youth  he  attended  the  lectures  of  Rab 
Nachman  and  of  R.  Chisda.  Later,  he  and  Abaye  were  fellow-students 
in  the  academy  of  Rabba  bar  Nachmani.  Here  he  developed  his 
dialectical  powers  by  which  he  soon  surpassed  all  his  contemporaries. 
He  opened  an  academy  in  Machuza  which  attracted  a  great  number  of 
students.  After  Abaye's  death  this  academy  supplanted  that  in  Pumba- 
ditha and  during  Raba's  lifetime  became  almost  the  only  seat  of  learn- 
ing in  Babylonia.  His  controversies  with  his  contemporaries,  especially 
with  his  rival  colleague  Abaye,  are  very  numerous.  Wherever  an 
opinion  of  Abaye  is  recorded  in  the  Talmud,  it  is  almost  always  fol- 
lowed by  the  contrary  view  and  argument  of  Raba. 

Q.Rah  Nachman  b.  Isaac  was  a  disciple  of  Rab  Nachman  (b. 
Jacob)  and  afterwards  an  oflicer  as  Resh  Calla  in  the  academy  of 
Raba.  After  the  death  of  the  latter  he  was  made  president  of  the 
academy  in  Pumbaditha  which  now  resumed  its  former  rank.  In  this 
capacity  he  remained  only  four  years  (352-356)  and  left  no  remarkable 
traces  of  his  activity.    Still  less  significant  was    the  activity  of  his 


»  The  often  very  subtile  argumentations  of  these  two  teachers 
became  so  proverbial  that  the  plirase  X3T|  ""^nxT  nvin  "the  critical 
questions  of  Abaye  and  Raba"  is  used  in  the  Talmud  as  a  sigiufication 
of  acute  discussions  and  minute  investigations,  so  in  Succah  28a. 

'  D"y'p  b"V"'2  ^^3X^  n>mi3  Nn^bn  Baba  Metzia  21b;  Sanhedrin 
27a;  Erubin  15a;  Kidd.  52a;  Gittin  34a, 


The  Expounders  of  the  Mishna. 


51 


successor  R.  Chama  from  Nahardea  who  held  the  office  for  twenty  one 
years  (356-377). 

7.  Rah  Papa  (bar  Chanan),a  disciple  of  Abaye  and  Raba,  founded 
a  new  school  in  Nares,  in  the  vicinity  of  Sura,  over  which  he  presided 
for  nineteen  years  (354-375).  He  adopted  the  dialectical  method  of  his 
former  teachers  without  possessing  their  ingenuity  and  their  inde- 
pendence, and  consequently  did  not  give  satisfaction  to  those  of  his 
hearers  who  had  formerly  attended  the  lectures  of  Raba.  One  of 
his  peculiarities    was  that  he  frequently  refers  to  popular    proverbs 

The  fourth  Generation  of  Babylonian  Amoraim  (375-427). 

§  23. 
B.   Pumbaditha. 


A.  Sura. 
1.  Rab  Ashe, 


C.  Nahardea. 
Amemar. 


1.  Rab  Zebid. 

2.  Rab  Dime. 
8.   Rafram. 

4.  Rab  Cahana. 

5.  Mar  Zutra. 


Remarks  and  Biographical  Sketches. 

A.  Rah  Ashe,  (son  of  Simaibar  Ashe)  was,  at  the  age  of  twenty, 
made  president  of  the  reopened  academy  of  Sura,  after  the  death 
of  Rab  Papa,  and  held  this  office  for  fifty  two  years.  Under  his 
presidency,  this  academy,  which  had  been  deserted  since  the  time  of 
Rabba  bar  Iluna,  regained  its  former  glory  with  which  Rab  had  invested 
it.  Combining  the  profundity  of  knowledge  which  formerly  prevailed 
in  this  academy  with  the  dialectic  methods  developed  in  that  of  Pumba- 
ditha, he  was  generally  recognized  as  the  ruling  authority,  so  that  his 
contemporaries  called  him  by  the  distinguishing  title  of  Rahhana  (our 
teacher).     Invested  with  this  great  authority,  Rab  Ashe  was  enabled 


»  This  Rab  Papa  must  not  be  mistaken  for  an  elder  teacher  by 
the  same  name,  who  had  ten  sons,  all  wed  versed  in  the  law,  one  of 
whom,  Rafram,  became  head  of  the  academy  of  Pumbadilha  in  the 
following  generation.  Neiiher  is  Rab  Papa  identical  with  Rab  Papi, 
a  distinguished  lawyer  who  flourished  in  a  former  generation. 


52  HSTORICAL  AND  LITERARY    INTRODUCTION. 

to  assume  the  task  of  sifting,  arranging  and  compiling  the  immense 
material  of  traditions,  commentaries  and  discussions  on  the  Mishna 
which,  during  the  two  preceding  centuries,  had  accumulated  in  the 
Babylonian  academies.  In  the  compilation  and  revision  of  this  gigantic 
work  which  is  embodied  in  the  Gemara,  he  was  occupied  for  over 
half  a  century,  and  still  he  did  not  complete  it  entirely  but  this  was 
done,  after  his  death,  by  his  disciples  and  successors. 

B.  During  the  long  period  of  Rab  Ashe's  activity  at  the  academy 
in  Sura,  the  following  teachers  presided  successively  over  the  academy 
in  Pumbaditha. 

1.  Rah  Zebid  (b.  Oshaya)  who  succeeded  Rab  Chama  and  held 
the  office  for  eight  years.  (377-385). 

2.  Rah  Dime  (b.  Chinena)  from  Nahardea,  presiding  only  for 
three  years  (385-388). 

3.  Rafram  har  Papa  the  elder,  in  his  youth  a  disciple  of  Raba, 
succeeded  R.  Dime  (388-394). 

4.  Rah  Cahana  (b.  Tachlifa),  likewise  a  disciple  of  Raba,  was 
one  of  the  former  teachers  of  R.  Ashe.  In  an  already  advanced  age 
he  was  made  president  of  the  academy  of  Pumbaditha,  and  died  in  the 
year  411.  This  Rab  Cahana  must  not  be  mistaken  for  two  other 
teachers  of  the  same  name,  one  of  whom  had  been  a  distinguished 
disciple  of  Rab,  and  the  other  (Rab  Cahana  b.  Manyome)  a  disciple  of 
Rab  Juda  b.  Jecheskel. 

5.  Mar  Zutra  who,  according  to  some  historians,  succeeded  Rab 
Cahana  as  rector  of  the  school  in  Pumbaditha  (411-414)  is  probably 
identical  with  Mar  Zutra  b.  Mare,  who  shortly  afterwards  held  the 
high  office  as  Exilarch.  In  the  rectorship  of  Pumbaditha  he  was  suc_ 
ceeded  by  Rah  Acha  har  Raha  (414-419):  and  the  latter  by  Rah  Gehiha 
(419-4333. 

C.  Amemar,  a  friend  of  Rab  Ashe,  was  a  distinguished  judge 
and  teacher  in  Nahardea.  When  his  former  teacher  Rab  Dime  became 
president  of  the  academy  in  Pumbaditha,  he  succeeded  him  in  the  rector- 
ship of  that  of  Nahardea  from  390  to  about  422.  With  him  this  once 
BO  celebrated  seat  of  learning  passed  out  of  existence. 


The  Expounders  of  the  Mishna.  53 

The  fifth  Generation  of  Babylonian  Amoraim  (421-468). 

§  24. 


A.     Sura. 

1.  Mar  Jemar  (Maremar). 

2.  Rab  Ide  bar  Abin. 

3.  Mar  bar  Rab  Ashe. 

4.  Rab  Acha  of  Difte. 


B.     Pumbaditha. 

1.  Rafram  II. 

2.  Recliumai. 

3.  Rab  Sama  b.  Rabba. 


Remarks  and  Biographical  Sketches. 

A.  1.  Mar  Jemar  (contracted  to  Maremar),  who  enjoyed  high 
esteem  with  the  leading  teachers  of  his  time,  succeeded  his  colleague 
and  friend  Rab  Ashe  in  the  presidency  of  the  academy  in  Sura,  but 
held  tliis  office  only  for  about  five  years  (427-432). 

5.  Rab  Ide  (or  Ada)  bar  Abin  became,  after  Mar  Jemar's  death, 
president  of  the  academy  at  Sura  and  held  this  office  for  about  twenty 
years  (432-452).  He  as  well  as  his  predecessor  continued  the  compilation 
of  the  Talmud  which  Rab  Ashe  had  commenced. 

3.  Mar  bar  Rab  Ashe,  whose  surname  was  Tabyome,  and  who, 
for  some  unknown  reasons,  had  been  passed  over  in  the  election  of  a 
successor  to  his  father,  was  finally  made  president  of  the  academy  in 
Sura  and  filled  this  office  for  thirteen  years  (455-468).  In  his  frequent 
discussions  with  contemporary  authorities  he  exhibits  independence  of 
opinion  and  great  faculties  of  mind. 

4.  Rab  Acha  of  Difte,  a  prominent  teacher,  was  on  the  point  of 
being  elected  as  head  of  the  academy  of  Sura,  but  was  finally  defeated 
by  Mar  bar  Rab  Ashe  who  aspired  to  that  office  which  his  father  had 
so  gloriously  filled  for  more  than  half  a  century. 

B.  The  academy  of  Pumbaditha  which  had  lost  its  earlier  influence, 
had  during  this  generation  successively  three  presidents,  of  whose 
activity  very  little  is  known,  namely: 

1.  Rafram  il  who  succeeded  Rab  Grebihah,  from  433  to  443. 

2.  Rab  Rechumai,  from  443-456. 

3.  Rab  Sama  b.  Rabba,  from  456-471. 

Toward  the  end  of  this  generation,  the  activity  of  both  academies 
was  almost  paralyzed  by  the  terrible  persecutions  which  the  Persian 
King  Firuz  instituted  against  the  Jews  and  their  religion. 


54  Historical  and  Litekary  Introduction. 

The  sixth  and  last  Generation  of  Babylonian  Amoraim 
(468-500). 

§25. 


A.     Sura. 

1 .  Rabba  Thospia  (or  Tosfaah). 

2.  Rabina. 


B.     Pumbaditha. 
Rab  Jose. 


Remarks  and  Biographical  Sketches. 

A.  1.  Rabba  of  Thospia  ^  succeeded  Mar  bar  Rab  Ashi  as  recfo: 
of  the  Suran  academy  just  at  the  time  when  the  Persian  King  Firnz 
had  ordered  the  Jewish  jurisdiction  to  be  abolished  and  the  academical 
assemblies  to  be  prohibited.  It  is  but  natural  that  under  such  circum- 
stances the  academical  activity  of  this  Rabbi  which  lasted  only  about 
six  years  could  not  amount  to  much. 

2.  Rabina  (contraction  of  Rab  Abina)  bar  Huna,^  who  succeeded 
Rabba  of  Thospia,  entered  his  office  which  he  held  from  488  to  499. 
under  more  favorable  circumstances,  since  the  persecution  had  ceased 
after  the  death  of  Firuz  and  the  academies  were  reopened.  He  conse- 
quently developed  a  great  activity,  the  object  of  which  w^as  to  complete 
and  close  the  compilation  of  the  Talmud  begun  by  Rab  Ashi.  In  this 
task  he  was  assisted  by  Rab  Jose,  the  school  head  of  Pumbaditha,  and 
by  some  associates. 

With  the  close  of  the  Talmud  and  the  death  of  Rabina  (499)  ended 
the  period  of  the  Amoraim.  The  Babylonian  teach^^rs  who  flourished 
during  the  subsequent  half  century  are  called  Saboraim  (\s-inD  p3"i). 
They  did  not  assume  the  authority  to  contradict  the  decisions  established 
by  the  Amoraim,  but  merely  ventured  to  express  an  opinion  (ino,  to 
reason,  think,  suppose,  opine)  and  to  fix  the  final  decision  in  cases  where 


1  Regarding  the  correct  name  and  native  place  of  this  Rabbi  see 
Leopold  Low's  "Lebensalter"  p.  376,  note  54,  and  Neubauer  G6ogr. 
du  Talm.,  p.  33:^. 

^  This  head  of  the  Suran  Academy  is  by  chronographers  usually  cal- 
led Rabina  II,  in  order  to  distinguish  him  from  a  former  teacher  Rabina 
who  was  a  disciple  of  Raba  and  flourished  in  the  fourth  generation. 
In  the  Talmud,  both  of  them  are  called  simply  Rabina.  and  only  from 
the  connection  it  is  to  be  seen  whether  it  refers  to  that  elder  teacher 
or  to  the  last  of  the  Amoraim. 


The  Expounders  of  the  Mishna.  55 

their  predecessors,  the  Amoraim,  disagreed.  They  gave  the  Talmud 
a  finishing  touch  by  adding  those  final  decisions,  also  numerous, 
especially  Agadic,  passages. 

B.  Rob  Jose  presided  over  the  academy  in  Pumbaditha  475-530. 
As  Rabina  was  the  last  Amora  for  Sura,  so  Rab  Jose  was  the  last  for 
Pumbaditha.  Flourishing  still  for  a  number  of  years  after  the  close  of 
the  Talmud,he  was  at  the  same  time  the  first  of  the  Saboraim,and  must 
be  considered  as  the  most  prominent  among  them. 

Of  Rab  Jose's  contemporaries  and  successors  who  like  himself 
formed  the  connecting  link  between  the  period  of  Amoraim  and  that 
of  the  Saboraim,  and  whose  opinions  and  controversies  are  still  recorded 
in  the  Talmud,  the  following  two  must  be  mentioned:  Bab  Achai  h. 
Hima  and  Bab  SamiLel  b,  Abbahu, 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE     GEMARA. 

Classification  of  its  contents  into  Halacha  and  Agada. 

§  26. 

Tne  collection  of  the  commentaries  and  discussions  of  the 
Amoraim  on  the  Mishna  is  termed  Gemara.  This  term,  derived 
from  the  verb  *it2i  which  iu  Hebrew  means  to  finish^  to  complete^ 
and  in  the  Aramaic  also  to  learn,  to  teach,  signifies  either  the 
completion,  the  supplement  (to  the  Mishna),  or  is  identical  with 
the  word  Talmud  which  is  often  used  in  its  place,  meaning,  the 
teaching,  the  study. 

Besides  being  a  discursive  commentary  on  the  Mishna,  the 
Gemara  contains  a  vast  amount  of  more  or  less  valuable  mate- 
rial which  does  not  always  have  any  close  connection  with  the 
Mishna  text,  as  legal  reports,  historical  and  biographical  infor- 
mations, religious  and  ethical  maxims  and  homiletical  remarks. 

The  whole  subject  matter  embodied  in  the  Gemara  is 
generally  classified  into  Halacha  and  Agada. 

To  Halacha '  belongs  that  which  has  bearing  upon  tne  law, 
hence  all  expositions,  discussions  and  reports  which  have  the 
object  of  explaining,  establishing  and  determining  legal  princip- 
les and  provisions.  The  principal  branches  of  the  Halacha  are 
indicated  by  the  names  of  the  six  divisions  of  the  Mishna,  and 
by  those  of  the  Masechtoth  belonging  to  each  division.  See 
above  pages  9-14. 

The  Agada ""  comprises  every  thing  not  having  the  character 

I  Halacha  (n^^n)  means  custom,  usage  practice;  then,  an 
adopted  rule,  a  traditional  laiv.  In  a  more  extended  meaning,  the 
term  applies  to  matters  bearing  upon  that  law. 

>  Agada  or  Aggada  (nUN  ,xmiN*  ,r]iyn,  derived  from  niJ  which 
jn  the  Hebrew  Hipliil  or  Aramaic  Aphcl  form  signifies  to  narrate,  to 
tell,  to  communicate)  means  that  which  is  related,  a  tale,  a  saying,  an 
individual  utterance  which  claims  no  binding  authority.  Regarding 
this  term,  see  W.  Bacher's  learned  and  exh^msive  article,  "The  origin 
of  the  word  Hagada  (Agada)"  in  the  Jev.ish  Quarterly  Review  (London) 


The  Gemara.  57 

of  Halacha,  hence  all  historical  records,  all  legends  and  par- 
ables, all  doctrinal  and  ethical  teachings  and  all  free  and  unre- 
strained interpretations  of  Scripture. 

According  to  its  different  contents  and  character,  the 
Agada  may  be  divided  into: 

1.  Exegetical  Agada,  giving  plain  or  homiletical  and  al- 
legorical explanations  of  Biblical  passages. 

2.  Dogmatical  Agada,  treating  of  God's  attrributes  and 
providence,  of  creation,  of  revelation,  of  reward  and  punishment, 
of  future  life,  of  Messianic  time,  etc. 

3.  ^MzV^/ Agada,  containing  aphorisms,  maxims,  proverbs, 
fables,  sayings  intending  to  teach  and  illustrate  certain  moral 
duties. 

4.  Historical  Agada,  reporting  traditions  and  legends 
concerning  the  lives  of  biblical  and  post-biblical  persons  or  con- 
cerning national  and  general  history. 

5.  Mystical  Agada,  refering  to  Cabala,  angelology,  demo- 
nology,  astrology,  magical  cures,  interpretation  of  dreams,  etc. 

6.  Miscellaneous  Agada,  containing  anecdotes,  observa- 
tions, practical  advices,  and  occassional  references  to  various 
branches  of  ancient  knowledge  and  sciences. 

Agadic  passages  are  often,  by  the  way,  interspersed  among 
matters  of  Halacha,  as  a  kind  of  diversion  and  recreation  after 
the  mental  exertion  of  a  tiresome  investigation  or  a  minute  dis- 
cussion on  a  dry  legal  subject.  Sometimes,  however,  the  Agada 
appears  in  larger  groups,  outweighing  the  Halacha  matter 
with  which  it  is  loosely  connected;  f  i.  Berachoth,  54a-64a; 
Sal)bath  30a-33b;  Mcgilla  lOb-lTa;  Gittin  55b-58b;  GYb-YOa; 
Sota  9a-14a;  B.  Bathra  14b-l'7a;  73a-76a;  Sanhedrin,  Perek 
Chelek. 

There  are  two  compilations  of  the  Gemara  which  differ  from 
each  other  in  language  as  well  as  in  contents;  the  one  made  in 
Palestine  is  called  Jerushalmi^  tlie  Jerusalem  Gemara  or  Talmud; 


Vol  IV,  pp.  406-429.  As  to  fuller  particulars  concerning  Halacha  and 
Agada,  see  Zunz'  G.  Vortraege  pp.  57-61  and  83  sq.;  also  Hamburger's 
Real  Encyclopiidie  II,  the  articles  Halacha  and  Agada. 


58  HlSTv3RICAL  AXD  LITERARY  INTRODUCTION. 

tho  other  originating  in  Babylonia  is  called  Bahli^    the  Baby- 
lonian Gemar  a  or  Talmud: 

Compilation  of  Jerushalmi,     The  Palestinian  Talmud. 

§  27. 

As  no  academy  existed  in  Jerusalem  after  the  destruction 
of  the  second  temple,  the  customary  appellation  Jerusalem  Tal- 
mud is  rather  a  misnomer.  More  correct  is  the  appellation  the 
Palestinian  Talmud  (^^nt^''  pS  Tl!D^n)  or  the  Gemara  of  the 
teachers  of  the  West  (s^n^D  ''^31  Snt::). 

Maimonides  in  the  introduction  to  his  Mishna  commentary 
ascribes  the  authorship  of  the  Palestinian  Talmud  to  the  celebrat- 
ed teacher  R.  Jochanan  who  flourished  in  the  third  century. 
This  statement,  if  literally  taken,  cannot  be  correct,  since  so 
many  of  the  teachers  quoted  in  that  Talmud  are  known  to  have 
flourished  more  than  a  hundred  years  after  R.  Jochanan.  This 
celebrated  Amora  may,  at  the  utmost,  have  given  the  first 
impulse  to  such  a  collection  of  commentaries  and  discussions  on 
the  Mishna,  which  was  continued  and  completed  by  his  succes- 
sors in  the  academy  of  Tiberias.  In  its  present  shape  the  work 
is  supposed  to  belong  to  the  fourth  or  fifth  century.  Some  modern 
scholars  assign  its  final  compilation  even  to  a  still  later  period 
namely  after  the  close  of  the  Babylonian  Talmud,  i 

The  Palestinian  Gemara,  as  before  us,  extends  only  over 
thirty  nine  of  the  sixty  three  Masechtoth  contained  in  the 
Mishna,  namelly  all  Masechtoth  of  Seder  Zeraim,  Seder  Moed, 
Nashim  and  Nezikin  with  the  exception  of  Eduyoth  and  Aboth. 
But  it  has  none  of  the  Masechtoth  belonging  to  Seder  Kodashim, 
and  of  those  belonging  to  Seder  Teharoth  it  treats  only  of  Ma- 
secheth  Mdda.     (see  above  pages  12-14). 

Some  of  its  Masechtoth  are  defective;  thus  the  last  four 


1  Critical  researches  on  this  subject  are  found  in  Geiger's  Jued. 
Zeitschrift  f.  Wissenschaft  1870;  Z.  Frankel  Mebo,  p.  46  sq.  and  in 
Wiesner's  Gibeath  Jeruschalaim    (Vienna  1872). 

I.  H.  Weiss  (Dor  Dor  III,  p.  114  sq.)  regards  R.  Jose  (bar  Zabda)  who 
was  a  colleague  of  R.  Jonah  and  one  of  the  last  authorities  in  Palestine, 
as  the  very  compiler  of  the  Pal.  Talmud  which  in  the  foUowing 
generation  was  completed  by  R.  Jose  bar  Bun  (Abun). 


The  Gemaha  59 

Perakim  of  Sabbath  and  the  last  Perek  of  Maccoth  are  wanting. 
Of  the  ten  Perakim  belonging  to  Masecheth  Nidda  it  has  only 
the  first  three  Perakim  and  a  few  lines  of  the  fourth. 

There  are  some  indications  that  elder  commentators  were 
acquainted  with  portions  of  the  Palestinian  Gemara  which  arc 
now  missing,  and  it  is  very  probable  that  that  Gemara  origin- 
ally extended  to  all  or,  at  least,  to  most  of  the  Masechtoth  of 
the  Mishna.  The  loss  of  the  missing  Masechtoth  and  portions 
thereof  may  be  explained  partly  by  the  many  persecutions  which 
interrupted  the  activity  of  the  Palestinian  academies,  partly  by 
the  circumstance  that  the  Pclcstinian  Gemara  did  not  command 
that  general  attention  and  veneration  which  was  bestowed  on 
the  Babylonian  Gemara. 

Compilation  of  Babli,     the  Babylonian  Talmud. 
§  28. 

The  compilation  of  the  l^abylonian  Talmud  is  generally  as- 
cribed to  Rab  Ashe  who  for  more  than  fifty  years  (3 7 5-42 V) 
officiated  as  head  of  the  academy  in  Sura.  It  is  stated  that  it 
took  him  about  thirty  years  to  collect,  sift  and  arrange  the  im- 
mense material  of  this  gigantic  work.  During  the  remaining 
second  half  of  his  activity  he  revised  once  more  the  whole  work 
and  made  in  it  many  corrections.  This  corrected  edition  is 
termed  S"in3  S-i.nnD  the  latter  revision^  and  the  former  i<")MnD 
t^Dp  the  first  revision.  ^ 

»     See  Baba   Bathra  fol  157b. 

Those  scliolars  who  maintain  that  the  Mishna  was  not  written 
down  by  R.  Jehuda  Hanasi,  but  that  he  merely  arranged  it  orally 
(see  above  p.  5,  note),  maintain  the  same  in  regard  to  Rab  Ashe's 
compilation  of  the  Gemara,  without  being  able  to  state  when  and  by 
wliom  it  was  actually  commited  to  writing.  Against  this  opinion  it 
has  been  properly  argued  that  it  must  be  regarded  as  absolutely 
impossible  for  a  work  so  voluminous,  so  variegated  in  contents  and  so 
full  of  minute  and  intricate  discu -sions,  as  the  Talmud,  to  have  been 
orally  arranged  and  fixed,  and  accurately  transmitted  Irom  generation 
to  generation.  On  the  screngrli  of  this  argument  and  of  t^ome  in- 
dications found  in  the  Tabnud,  Z.  Frankel  (in  his  Mobo  p.  47)  even 
regards  it  OS  very  probaMe  that  Rab  Ashe  in  compiling  the  Gemara 
made  use  of  some  minor  coni])ilation'^  which  existed  before  him,  and 
of  some  written  records  and  menioramla  containing  short  abstracid 
of  the  academical  discussions  in  the  preceding  generations.    Collecting 


60  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

But  Rab  Ashe  did  not  succeed  in  finishing  the  gigantic 
work.  It  was  continued  and  completed  by  his  disciples  and 
successors,  especially  by  the  last  Amoraim  Rabina  II  who  from 
488  to  499  presided  over  the  academy  in  Sura,  and  R.  Jose,  the 
school-head  of  Pumbaditha.  Some  additions  were  made  by  the 
Saboraim,  and  perhaps  even  by  some  still  later  hands. 

The  Gemara  of  the  Babylonian  Talmud  covers  only  thirty 
seven  Masechtoth  of  the  Mishna,  namely: 

Of  Zeraim  only  one,  Berachoth,  ommitting  the  remaining 
ten  Masechtoth; 

Of  Moed  eleven,  omitting  only  Shekalim  which  in  our 
Talmud  editions  is  replaced  by  the  Palestinian  Gemara; 

Of  Nashim  all  of  the  seven  Masechtoth  beloning  to  that 
division; 

Of  Nezikin  eight,  omitting  Eduyoth  and  Aboth; 

Of  Kodashim  nine,  omitting  Middoth  and  Kinnim.  In 
Thamid  only  chapters  I.  II.  lY  are  provided  with  Gemara,  but 
not  chapters  III.  Y.  YI  and  YII. 

Of  Teharoth    only  Nidda;    omitting  eleven  Masechtoth. 

There  being  no  traces  of  the  Gemara  missing  to  twenty  six 
Masechtoth,  it  is  very  probable  that  this  part  of  the  Gemara 
has  never  been  compiled,  though  those  Masechtoth  have  un- 
doubtedly also  been  discussed  by  the  Babylonian  Amoraim,  as  is 
evident  from  frequent  references  to  them  in  the  Gemara  on  the 
other  Masechtoth.  The  neglect  of  compiling  these  discussions 
may  be  explained  by  the  circumstance  that  those  Masechtoth 
mostly  treat  of  laws  which  had  no  practical  application  outside 
of  Palestine.  This  is  especially  the  case  with  the  Masechtoth 
of  Zeraim,  except  Berachoth,   and  those  of  Teharoth,    except 


and  arranging  these  records  he  partly  enlarged  them  by  fuller  explan- 
ations, partly  left  them  just  as  he  found  them.  Some  traces  of  such 
memoranda,  made  probably  by  R  Ashe's  predecessors,  are  stiii  found  in 
numerous  passages  of  the  Talmud.  We  refer  to  the  mnemonical 
signs  and  symbols  (D^JO*D)  wliich  every  now  and  tlien  are  there  met 
with  (in  brackets)  as  headings  of  discussions  and  mdicating  either  the 
names  of  the  teachers  to  be  quoted  or  tlie  order  of  the  subjects  to 
be  discussed.  A  critical  investigation  on  these  often  very  enigmatic 
Simanim  is  found  in  Jacob  Briill's  ^>)0  K^IH  Die  Mnemotechnik  des 
Talmuds  [Vienna  1864). 


The  Gemara.  61 

I>i(Ida.  It  was  different  with  the  Masechtoth  belonging  to 
Kodashira  which,  though  treating  of  the  sacrificial  laws,  are  fully 
dirfcussed  in  the  Babylonian  Talmud,  as  it  was  a  prevailing 
opinion  of  the  Rabbis  that  the  merit  of  being  engaged  with  the 
study  of  those  laws  was  tantamount  to  the  actual  performance 
of  the  sacrificial  rites  (See  Talm.  Menachoth  110a). 

The  absence  of  Geinara  on  the  Masechtoth  Eduyoth  and 
Aboth  is  easily  accounted  for  by  the  very  nature  of  their 
contents  which  admitted  of  no  discussions. 

The  two  Gemauas  compared  with  each  other. 
§29. 

The  Palestinian  and  the  Babylonian  Gem ar as  differ  from  each 
other  in  language  and  style  as  well  as  in  material  and  in  the 
method  of  treating  the  same,   also  in  arrangement. 

As  regards  the  language,  the  Palestinian  Gemara  is 
composed  in  the  West  Aramaic  dialect  which  prevailed  in  Pa- 
lestine at  the  time  of  the  Amoraim. 

The  language  of  the  Babylonian  Gemara  is  a  peculiar  idiom, 
being  a  mixture  of  Hebrew  and  East  Aramaic  with  an  occasional 
sprinkling  of  Persian  words.  Quotations  from  Mishna  and 
Baraitha  and  sayings  of  the  elder  Amoraim  are  given  in  the 
original,  that  is,  the  New  Hebrew  (Mishnic)  language,  while 
forms  of  judicial  and  notary  documents  and  popular  legends  of 
later  origin  are  often  given  in  the  Aramaic  idiom. 

Although  the  Palestinian  Gemara  extends  to  two  more  Ma- 
sechtoth than  the  Babylonian,  its  total  material  amounts  only 
to  about  one  third  of  the  latter.  Its  discussions  are  generally 
very  brief  and  condensed,  and  do  not  exhibit  that  dialectic 
acumen  for  which  the  Babylonian  Gemara  is  noted.  The  Agada 
in  the  Palestinian  Gemara  includes  more  reliable  and  valuable 
historical  records  and  references,  and  is,  on  the  whole,  more 
rational  and  sober,  though  less  attractive  than  the  Babylonian 
Agada  which  generally  appeals  more  to  the  heart  and  imagin- 
ation. But  the  latter,  on  many  occasions,  indulges  too  much 
in  gross  exaggerations,  and  its  popular  sayings,  especially  those 
evidently  interpolated  by  later  liands,  have  often  an  a*lmixt,ire 
of  superstitious  views  borrowed  irom  the  Persian  surroundings. 


62  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

The  arrangement  of  the  material  in  the  two  Talmuds  dif- 
fers in  this,  that  in  the  Babylonian,  the  Gemara  is  attached  to 
the  single  paragraphs  (sn^:n:2)  of  the  Mishna,  while  in  the 
Palestinian  all  paragraphs  (there  termed  n^^bn)  belonging  to 
one  Perek  of  the  Mishna,  are  generally  placed  together  at  the 
head  of  each  chapter.  The  comments  and  discussions  of  the 
Gemara  referring  to  the  successive  paragraphs,  are  then  marked 
by  the  headings  'N*  n::^"  '2  r^bn  and  so  on. 

The  two  Gemara  collections  make  no  direct  mention  of 
each  other  as  literary  works.  But  the  names  and  opinions  of 
the  Palestinian  authorities  are  very  often  quoted  in  the  Babyl- 
onian Gemara;  and  in  a  similar  way,  though  not  to  the  same 
extent,  the  Palestinian  Gemara  mentions  the  views  of  the  Bab- 
ylonian authorities.  This  exchange  of  opinions  was  effected 
by  the  numerous  teachers  who  are  known  to  have  emigrated  or 
frequently  travelled  from  the  one  country  to  the  other. 

The  study  of  the  Babylonian  Talmud,  having  been  trans- 
planted from  its  native  soil  to  North  Africa,  and  the  European 
countries  (especially  Spain,  France,  Germany  and  Poland),  was 
there  most  sedulously  and  religiously  cultivated  in  the  Jewish 
communities,  and  gave  rise  to  an  immense  Rabbinical  literature. 
The  Palestinian  Talmud  never  enjoyed  such  general  veneration 
and  attention.  Eminent  Rabbis  alone  were  thoroughly  convers- 
ant with  its  contents,  and  referred  to  it  in  their  writings.  It  is 
only  in  modern  times  that  Jewish  scholars  have  come  to  devote 
more  attention  to  this  Talmud,  for  the  purpose  of  historical  and 
literary  investigations. 


CHAPTSR    VI. 

APOCRYPHAL  APPENDICES  TO  THE  TALMUD. 

§30. 

Besides  the  Masechtoth  contained  in  the  Mishna  and  the 
two  Geinaras,  there  are  several  Masechtoth  composed  in  the 
form  of  the  Mishna  and  Tosephta,  that  treat  of  ethical,  ritual, 
and  liturgical  precepts.  They  stand  in  the  same  relation  to 
the  Talmud  as  the  Apocrypha  to  the  canonical  books  of  the 
Bible.  When  and  by  whom  they  were  composed,  cannot  be  as- 
certained. Of  these  apocryphal  treatises,  the  following  are  ap- 
pended to  our  editions  of  the  Talmud: 

L  Aboth  d' Rabbi  Nathan  ]nj  i^ll  m2S,  divided  into  41 
chapters  and  a  kind  of  Tosephta  to  the  Mishnic  treatise 
'*Pirke  Aboth,"  the  ethical  sentences  of  which  are  here  con 
siderably  enlarged  and  illustrated  by  numerous  narratives.  In 
its  present  shape,  it  belongs  to  the  post-Talmudic  period,  though 
some  elements  of  a  Baraitha  of  R.  Nathan  (who  was  a  Tana 
belonging  to  the  fourth  generation)  may  have  been  embodied 
therein. ' 

2.  Sopherim  Cn^lD  the  Scribes, containing  in  21chapters  rules 
for  the  writing  of  the  scrolls  of  the  Pentateuch,  and  of  the  book 
of  Esther  ;  also  Masoretic  rules,  and  liturgical  rules  for  the  ser- 
vice on  Sabbath,  Feast  and  Fast  days.  R.  Asher  already 
expressed  (in  his  Hilchoth  Sepher  Thora)  the  opinion  that  this 
Masecheth  Sopherim  belongs  to  the  period  of  the  Gaonim. " 


»  Compare  Ziinz,  Gottesd.Vortraege,  p.  108,  sq.— Solomon  Taussig 
published  in  his  U'h^  mj  (Munich  1873)  from  a  Manuscript  of  tbe 
Library  in  Munich  a  recension  of  the  Aboth  d'Rabbi  Nathan  which 
differs  considerably  from  that  printed  in  our  Talmud  editions.  The 
latest  edition  of  Aboth  d.  R.  N.  in  two  recensions  from  MSS.  with 
critical  annotations  was  published  by  S.  Schechter  (Vienna  1887). 

'  See  Zunz,  GD.  V.  p.  95,  sq.  The  latest  separate  edition  of  Ma- 
secheth Sopherim  from  a  MS.  and  with  a  German  commentary 
was  published  by  Joel  Mueller,  (Leipsic  1878), 


64  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

3.  Ebel  Rabhathi^rc:^  hz'^  (the  large  treatise  on  Mourn- 
ing), euphemistically  called  nn^t^  Semachoih  (Joys),  is 
divided  into  14  chapters,  and  treats,  as  indicated  by  the  title, 
of  rules  and  customs  concerning  burial  and  mourning.  It  is 
not  identical  with  a  treatise  under  the  same  title,  quoted  already 
in  the  Talmud  (Moed  Katon  24a ;  26a  ;  Kethuboth  28a),  but 
seems  to  be  rather  a  reproduction  of  the  same  with  later  additions. ') 

4.  Callah  n^^  (the  bride,  the  woman  recently  married). 
This  minor  Masechta, being  likewise  a  reproduction  of  a  Masechta 
by  that  name,  mentioned  already  in  the  Talmund  (Sabbath  114  a; 
Taanith  10b;  Kiddushin  49b;  Jer.  Berachoth,  II,  5.),  treats 
in  one  chapter  of  the  duties  of  chastity  in  marriage  and  in 
general. 

5.  Derech  ^r^/s  ps  ^m  (the  conduct  of  life),  divided 
into  11  chapters,  the  first  of  which  treats  of  prohibited  mar- 
riages, and  the  remaining  chapters,  of  ethical,  social  and  religious 
teachings.  References  to  a  treatise  by  that  name,  are  made 
already  in  the  Talmud  (B.  Berachoth  22a  and  Jer.  Sabbath 
YI,  2.) 

6.  Derech  Eretz  Zuta  stoiT  pS  "|m  (the  conduct  of 
life,  minor  treatise),  containing  10  chapters,  replete  with 
rules  and  maxims  of  wisdom.^ 

Y.  Perek  Ha-shalom  Ql^^TI  p*lS  (chapter  on  Peace)  consists, 
as  already  indicated  by  the  title,  only  of  one  chapter,  treating 
of  the  importance  of  peacefulness. 

Remark:-Beside  these  apocryphal  treatises  appended  to  our 
editions  of  the  Talmud  under  the  general  title  of  njtDp  mn^DD 
•'Minor  Treatises,"  there  are  seven  lesser  Masechtoth  which 
were  published  by  Raphael  Kirchheim  from  an  ancient  manu- 
script.    (Frankfort  on  the  Main  1851.) 

~»  See  Zunz,  G.  V.  p.  90,  and  N.  Brtill  "Die  talm.  Tractate  uber 
Trauer  um  Verstorbene  (Jahrbiicher  fiir  Jiid.  Geschichte  und  Litera- 
tur  I  (Frankfurt  a.  M.)  p.  1-57.  M.  Klotz  just  published  **Der  Talm. 
Tractat  Ebel  Rabbathi  nach  Handschriften  bearbeitet,  uberzetzt  und 
mifc  Anmerkungen  versehen"  Frankf.  on  the  Main,  1892. 

^  On  both  of  these  Masechtoth  Derech  Eretz  see  Zunz  GD.  V. 
pp.  110-112.  8ee  also:  Abr.  Tawrogi  "Der  Talm.  Tractat  Derech  Erez 
Sutta  Kritisch  bearbeitet,  iibersetzt  und  erlautert'*  (Berlin  18«5), 


CHAPTER  VII. 

COMMENTARIES  ON  THE  TALMUD. 

The  necessity  for  such  Commentaries. 

§31. 

The  Talmud  offers  to  its  students  great  difiBculties,  partly 
on  account  of  the  peculiar  idiom  in  which  it  is  written  and  which 
is  intermixed  with  so  numerous,  often  very  mutilated,  foreign 
words  ;  partly  on  account  of  the  extreme  brevity  and  succinct- 
ness of  its  style,  the  frequent  use  of  technical  terms  and  phrases, 
and  mere  allusions  to  matters  discussed  elsewhere  ;  partly 
also,  on  account  of  the  circumstance  that,  in  consequence  of 
elliptical  expressions,  and  in  the  absence  of  all  punctuation  marks, 
question  and  answer, in  the  most  intricate  discussions,  are  some- 
times so  closely  interwoven,  that  it  is  not  easy  to  discern  at 
once,  where  the  one  ends  and  the  other  begins.  To  meet  all 
these  difficulties,  which  are  often  very  perplexing,  numerous 
commentaries  have  been  written  by  distinguished  Rabbis. 
Some  of  the  commentaries  extend  to  the  whole  Talmud,  or  a 
great  portion  thereof;  others  exclusively  to  the  Mishna,  or  some 
of  its  sections.  The  following  are  the  most  important  com- 
mentaries which  are  usually  printed  in  our  Talmud,  and  in  the 
separate  Mishna  editions. 

A.    COMMENTARIES  ON  THE    BABYLONIAN  TALMUD. 
§32. 

1.  The  celebrated  Rabbenu  Chananel{j\'^)  of  Kairwan 
(Africa),  flourishing  in  the  beginning  of  the  eleventh  century, 
wrote  a  commentary  on  the  greater  portion  of  the  Talmud, 
which  is  often  quoted  by  later  commentators,  and  is  now  printed 
in  the  latest  Talmud  edition  of  Wilna. 

2.  i?a^/^/v'»^-(,  as  the  prince  of  commentators  is  generally 
called  from  the  initials  of  his  name,  Rabbi  Solomon  Isaaki,  of 
Troyes  (1040—1105),  wrote  a  commentary  on  almost  the  whole  of 


66  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

the  Babylonian  Talmud,  which  is  printed  in  all  editions  thereof. 
It  is  a  true  model  of  concise,  clear  and  systematic  commentation. 
By  a  few  plain  words  it  often  sheds  light  upon  the  obscurest 
passages,  and  unravels  the  most  entangled  arguments  of  the 
Talmudical  discussions.  As  if  anticipating  the  slightest  hesita- 
tion of  the  unexperienced  student,  it  offers  him  at  once  the 
needed  explanation,  or  at  least  a  hint  that  leads  him  the  right 
way.  It  has  truly  been  said  that  but  for  this  peerless  comment- 
ary of  Rashi,  the  Babylonian  Talmud  would  have  remained  as 
neglected  as  the  Palestinian.  An  additional  merit  of  that  com- 
mentary is  the  fact  that  it  very  often  establishes  the  correct 
version  of  the  corrupted  Talmud  text.  Such  corrections  are 
generally  headed  by  the  initials  yn  (standing  for  ]yo^}  ''^H 
*'thus  we  are  to  read"). 

3.  Supplements  and  additions  to  Rashi's  commentary. 
The  commentary  on  some  Masechtoth,  not  being  finished  by 
Rashi,  was  completed  in  his  spirit  by  his  relatives  and  disciples. 
His  son-in-law  R.  Jehuda  b.  Nathan  completed  that  on  Maccoth 
from  fol.  19b.;  his  grandson  R.  Samuel  b.  Meir  d'^'^"!  com- 
pleted that  on  B.  Batlira  from  fol.  29a.  The  last  mentioned 
author,  besides,  added  his  commentary  to  Rashi's  on  the  last 
Perek  of  Pesachim.  The  missing  commentary  of  Rashi  on  Ned- 
arim  from  fol.  22b.  is  supplemented  by  that  of  his  predecessor, 
the  celebrated  Rabbenu  Gershom.^  To  this  commentary  on 
ISTedarim  two  others  are  added  in  our  Talmud  editions,  one  by 
Rabbenu  Nissim  (j'n)  and  the  other  by  R.  Asher  V^'\n,  both 
flourishing  in  the  fourteenth  century. 

4.  Tosaphoth  (meaning  Additions)  are  a  collection  of  an- 
notations printed  in  all  Talmud  editions  on  the  exterior  margin 
of  the  page,  while  the  interior  margin  on  the  opposite  side  of 
the  Talmud  text  is  generally  assigned  to  Rashi's  commentary. 
They  are  not,  like  the  latter,  a  running  commentary,  but  rather 
separate  remarks  and  discussions  on  some  passage  of  the  text, 
intended  to  elucidate  its  meaning.  Sometimes  the  explanations 


>  Some  bibliographers  maintain  that  also  the  commentary  on 
Nazir  and  Meilah,  ascribed  to  Rashi,  does  not  belong  to  him,  but  to 
his  disciples. 


Commentaries  on  the  Talmud.  67 

given  in  the  commentaries  of  R.  Clmnancl  and  Rashi  are 
criticised  and  corrected.  The  latter  of  these  two  commentaries 
is,  byway  of  excellence,  generally  designated  as  Coniros  {o^'[^yp 
covimentarius).  The  Tosaphoth  often  display  great  acumen  and 
hair-splitting  dialectics  in  Unding,  and  again  harmonizing,  ap- 
parent contradictions  between  passages  of  the  Talmud.  Such 
questions  of  contradiction  are  generally  introduced  by  the  phrases: 
ntDSn  DS^(abbrev.  n'Sl)  ^'ifthou  wilt  say  or  object..",  or  T^C^>^\  "it 
is  astonishing  that . .",  or  s-^n  "thou  mayest  say  or  object. .  • 
or  n*^p  "here  is  the  difficulty  that . . . .,"  and  the  final  solution 
of  the  questioner  difficulty  by  lO^'?  ^'^\  (abbr.V''',)  "but  it  may  be 
said  in  answer  to  this " 

The  numerous  authors  of  these  Tosaphoth  (mSDin  'h'^l  The 
Tosaphists,  the  glossarists)  flourished  during  the  12th  and  13th 
centuries  in  France  and  Germany.  To  the  first  among  them  be- 
long the  nearest  relatives  and  disciples  of  Rashi,  namely  his  two 
sons-in-law  R.  Meir  b.  Samuel  and  R.  Jehuda  b.  Nathan  (]':i''-i) ; 
hisgrandsonsR.  Isaac  b.  Meir  (□'3''n),R.  Samuel  b.Meir  (Q'^tTi)- 
and  R.  Jacob  b.  Meir,  called  Rabbenu  Tam  (n'-i)  and  a  nephew 
of  the  latter,  R.  Isaac  b.  Samuel,  ofDampierre  QpTH  •'"l). 

Other  authorities  frequently  mentioned  in  the  Tosaphoth 
are:  R.  Jehuda b.  Isaac,  of  Paris,  called  Sir  Leon  (12th  century); 
R.  Perez  b.  Elias  in  Corbeil  (13th  century).^ 

The  Tosaphoth  printed  in  our  Talmud  editions  are 
merely  extracts  of  older  collections,  namely  of  '^Tosaphoth 
Sen3"by  R.Samson  b.  Abraham  of  Sens  (abbrev.  S'2'^1,  not  to  be 
confounded  with  the  same  abbreviation  of  R.  Solomon  b.Adereth) 
who  flourished  in  the  beginning  of  the  13th  eentury,  and  prin- 
cipally of  ''Tosaphoth  Tuch"  or  Touqucs  by  R.  Eliezer  of  Tuch, 
(Touques),  second  part  of  that  century. 

A  collection  of  ''former  Tosaphoth"  D'^r^"' mSDinon  Yoma 
is,  in  some  editions,  appended  to  that  Mascchta.  R.  Moses  of 
Coucy,  the  author  of  S'mag,  is  supposed  to  have  been  the  origin- 
ator of  that  collection. 


»     A  full  list  of  the  Tosaphists  is  given  by  Zuuz,    Zur  Geschichte 
und  Literatur,  pp.  29-60. 


68  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

An  anonymous  author  of  the  14th  century,  excerpted  from 
all  Tosaphoth  the  practical  results  of  their  remarks  and  discuss- 
ions. These  paragraphed  excerpts  called  mSDIH  ''pDB  (Decisions 
of  the  Tosaphoth)  are  in  our  Talmud  editions  appended  to  each 
Masechta. 

Remark  1.  References  to  certain  passages  in  Rashi  as  well  as 
Tosaphoth  are  usually  made  by  citing  the  beginning  words,  or  the  catch 
words  (b^nncn  ~IU1  abbrev.  n"n)  of  that  passage. 

Remark  2.  Of  the  great  number  of  later  commentaries  and  super- 
commentaries,  generally  pubUshed  in  separate  volumes,  the  following 
are  appended  to  some  Talmud  editions: 

a.  rxoh^  n03n  or  ^"^sr^'O  ^t^^n^n  by  Solomon  Luria  6''B^"inO),  in 
the  XVI  century.  This  shorter  commentary  is  valuable  especially  on 
account  of  its  numerous  critical  emendations  in  the  reading  of  the  Tal. 
mud  text  as  well  as  of  Rashi  and  Tosaphoth. 

b.  S"EJ'"inD  ^SJ^n^n,  Novellae,  i.  e.  new  comments  by  R.  Samue^ 
Edels  (of  Posen,  died  in  the  year  1631).  In  these  explanatory  and 
dialectical  comments  on  Talmudical  passages,  and  on  Rashi  and 
Tosaphoth,  the  author  often  displays  a  high  degree  of  sagacity  and 
penetration. 

0.  )0""inC  ^EJ'n^n,  Novellae,  i.  e.  new  comments  by  R.  Meir  Lublin 
(Rabbi  in  Cracow  and  Lemberg,  died  in  the  year  1616).  These  likewise 
very  sagacious  comments  refer  mostly  to  the  Tosaphoth. 

B.   COMMENTARIES  EXCLUSIVELY  ON  THE  MISHNA. 
§33. 

1.  The  first  to  write  a  commentary  on  the  whole  Mishna 
was  Moses  Maimonides  [XII  century].  He  commenced  it  in 
the  23rd  year  of  his  age,  in  Spain,  and  finished  it  in  his  30th 
year,  in  Egypt.  This  commentary  was  written  in  Arabic, 
manuscripts  of  which  are  to  be  found  in  the  Bodleian  Library 
at  Oxford,  and  in  some  other  libraries.  From  the  Arabic  it 
was  translated  into  Hebrew  by  several  scholars,  flourishing  in 
the  XIII  century,  namely  Seder  Zeraim,  by  Jehuda  Charizi; 
Seder    Moed,   oy  Joseph  Ibn  Alfual;   Seder  Nashim,  by  Jacob 


Commentaries  on  the  Talmud.  69 

Achrtai  (or  Abbasi').  Seder  Nezikin,  by  Solomon  b.  Joseph, 
with  the  exception  of  Perek  Chelek  in  Sanhedrin  and  Masecheth 
Aboth,  including  the  ethical  treatise  Sh'mone  Perakim,  in- 
troducing the  latter,  which  were  translated  by  Samuel  Ibn 
Tibbon;  Seder  Kodashim,  by  Nathanel  Ibn  Almuli;  the  trans- 
lator of  Seder  Teharoth  is  not  known.  These  translations  are 
appended  to  all  Talmud  editions,  behind  each  Mascchta  under 
the  heading  of  D"2Dnn^  m"^:trt:n  Din-'S. 

The  characteristic  feature  of  this  commentary  of  Maimonides 
consists  in  this,  that  it  follows  the  analytical  method,  laying 
down  at  the  beginning  of  each  section  the  principles  and  general 
views  of  the  subject,  and  thereby  throwing  light  upon  the  par- 
ticulars to  be  explained,  while  Rashi  in  his  Talmud  commentary 
adopted  the  synthetical  method,  commencing  with  the  explan- 
ation of  the  particulars,  and  thereby  leading  to  a  clear  under- 
standing of  the  whole  of  the  subject  matter. 

2.  Several  distinguished  Rabbis  wrote  commentaries  on 
single  sections  of  the  Mishna,  especially  on  those  Masechtoth  to 
which  no  Babylonian  Gemara  (and  hence  no  Rashi)  exists.  Of 
these  commentaries  the  following  are  found  in  our  Talmud 
editions: 

a.  ty"nn  lying's  on  all  Masechtoth  of  Seder  Zeraim,  except 
Berachoth,  and  all  Masechtoth  of  Seder  Teharoth,  except  Nidda, 
by  E.  Simson  of  Sens  (XII  century),  the  celebrated  Tosaphist. 

b.  ^^''^nn  tm''S,  on  the  same  Masechtoth,  by  E.  Asherb. 
Yechiel  (XIII  ccmtury)  the  author  of  the  epitome  of  the  Talmud 
which  is  appended  to  all  Masechtoth. 

c.  ^'^  lyil^'S  on  Masecheth  Middoth,  by  R,  She?naya  who 
is  supposed  to  have  been  a  disciple  of  Rashi. 

d.  T'nsnn  irin^'S  on  Masecheth  Eduyoth,  hj  R.  Abraha?n 
b.  Davta\XlI  cent.),  the  celebrated  author  of  critical  annotations 
on  Maimonides'  Talmudical  code. 

e.  Commentary  on  the  Masechtoth  Kinnim  and  Tamid 
by  an  anonymous  author. 

3.  R.  Obadya  of  Bertinoro  in  Italy,  and  Rabbi  in  Jerusalem 
(d.  in  the  year  1510),  wrote  a  very  lucid  commentary  on  the 
whole  Mishna  which  accompanies  the  text  in  most  of  our  separate 

»    See  Gra«tz,  Geschichte  d.  J.  vol.  VII,  p.  303. 


to  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

Mishna  editions.  He  follows  the  synthetic  method  of  Rashi,  and 
adds  to  each  paragraph  of  the  Mishna  the  result  of  the  discussion 
of  the  Gemara. 

4.  tD"V  mSDin  Additional  Comments  by  Vom  Tob  Lipman 
Heller,  Rabbi  of  Prague  and  Cracow  (XYII  century).  These 
comments  likewise  extending  to  all  parts  of  the  Mishna,  and 
accompanying  its  text  on  the  opposite  side  of  Bartinoro's  com- 
mentary in  most  of  our  Mishna  editions,  contain  very  valuable 
explanations  and  critical  remarks. 

5.  Of  shorter  commentaries  to  be  found  only  is  some  special 
editions  of  the  Mishna  text  the  following  may  be  mentioned: 

a.  n^'^'n  rV)  by  Jacob  Chagiz,  Rabbi  in  Jerusalem  (XVII 
century),  the  author  of  a  Talmudical  terminology  Techilath 
Cho  china. 

b.  nn:  rp  ^h^,  by  Senior  Phoebus  (XYIII  cent.).  This 
commentary  is  an  abstract  of  Bertinoros  and  Yom  Tob  Lipman 
Heller's  commentaries. 

c.  nmr)::,  hj  Isaac  Ibn  6^^^^^/ in  Leghorn  (XYII  century),  is 
generally  based  on  the  commentaries  of  Rashi  and  Maimonides. 

C.  Commentaries  on  the  Palestinian  Talmud. 
§  34. 

The  Palestinian  Talmud  was  not  as  fortunate  as  the  Babyl- 
onian in  regard  to  complete  and  lucid  commentaries.  Most  of 
the  commentaries  on  the  former  extend  only  to  some  sections 
or  parts  thereof,  and  none  of  them  dates  further  back  than  to 
the  sixteenth  century. 

The  first  commentary  on  the  whole  Palestinian  Talmud  by 
an  anonymous  author,  appeared  in  the  Cracow  edition  of  the 
year  1609,  and  is  reprinted  in  the  latest  Krotoschin  edition.  It 
is  a  brief  and  insufiicient  commentary. 

2.  y^^in""  mti^,  a  commentary  on  18  Masechtoth  by  H, 
Joshua  Benveniste  (XYII  century). 

3.  my  i^np  and  additions,  called  ]3np  ''Tt^*  on  Seder 
Moed,  Nashim  and  part  of  Nezikin  by  R.  David  Fraenkel,  Rabbi 
in  Dessau  and  later  in  Berlin,  (teacher  of  Moses  Mendelssohn, 
XYIII  century). 


Commentaries  on  the  Talmud.  *ll 

4.  ntt'D  ''JS  and  □''J2n  nSID,  a  double  commentary  on  the 
whole  Jerushalmi  ^j;  i?.  Moses  Margolioth  (XYITI  century).  This 
double  commentary  and  the  precedini^  of  David  Fraenkel  are 
embodied  in  the  Shitomir  edition  (1860-67). 

6-  iT*^  T\ZT\'^  onBerachoth,  Peahand  Demai  hj  Z.Frankel 
(Vienna  1874  and  Breslau  1875). 

6.  Commentary  on  Seder  Zeraim  and  Mosccheth  Shekalim 
by  Solomon  Syrileio  (or  Serillo)^  an  exile  from  Spain.  Of  this 
commentary  only  Berachoth  was  published  from  a  MS.  with 
annotations  by  M.  Lehmann  (Frank,  on  the  Main  1875). 

Regarding  some  other  commentaries  on  single  parts  of  the 
Palestinian  Talmud  see  Z.  Frankel,  Mebo  Ha-Jerushalmi 
134a-186a. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

EPITOMES  AND  CODIFICATIONS  OP  THE  TALMUD. 

Introductory. 
§  35. 

toiiice  the  Babylonian  Talmud  was  considered  by  most  of 
the  Jewish  communities  in  all  countries  as  the  source  of  the  rab- 
binical law  by  which  to  regulate  the  religious  life,  it  is  but 
natural  that  already  at  a  comparatively  early  period  attempts 
were  made  to  furnish  abstracts  of  the  same  for  practical  purposes. 
This  was  done  partly  by  epitomes  or  compendiums  which,  retain- 
ing the  general  arrangement  and  divisions  of  the  Talmud,  bring 
its  matter  into  a  narrower  compass  by  omitting  its  Agadic  and 
unnecessary  passages,  and  abridging  the  legal  discussions;  and 
partly  by  codes  in  which  the  results  of  the  discussed  legal  mat- 
ter is  presented  in  a  more  systematic  order.  The  first  attempts 
in  this  direction  were  made  by  R.  Jehudai  Gaon  of  Sura  (YIII 
century)  in  his  book  Halachoth  Ketuoth  (abridged  Halachoth), 
and  by  R.  Simon  of  Kahira  ( — IX  century)  in  his  {Halachoth 
Gedoloth.  Both  of  these  two  works  which  afterwards  coalesced 
into  one  work  still  extant  under  the  latter  title,  were  however 
eclipsed  by  later  master  works  of  other  celebrated  Rabbinical 
authorities. 

A.     Epitomes. 
§  36. 

The  principal  epitomes  or  compendiums  of  the  Talmud  are 
by  the  following  authors : 

1.  R.  Isaac  Alfasi  (after  the  initials  called  '^Rif,  born  in 
1013  near  the  city  of  Fez  in  Africa,  died  in  1103  as  Rabbi  at 
Lucena  in  Spain)  wrote  an  excellent  compendium  which  he  called 
'^Halachoth"  but  which  is  usually  called  by  the  name  of  its 
author  ^DS^S  or  D"''"i.  In  this  compendium  he  retains  the 
general  arrangement,  the  language  and  style  of  the  Talmud, 
but  omits,  besides  the  Agada,   all  parts  and  passages  which 


Epitomes  and  Codifications.  73 

concern  laws  that  had  become  obsolete  since  the  destruction  of 
the  temple.  Besides,  he  condensed  the  lengthy  discussions,  and 
added  his  own  decision  in  cases  not  clearly  decided  in  the  Talmud. 

Remark.  Alf asi's  compendium  comprises  in  print  three  large  folio 
volumes  in  which  the  text  is  accompanied  by  Rashi's  Talmud  com- 
mentary and,  besides,  by  numerous  commentaries,  annotations  and 
glosses,  especially  those  by  R.  Nissim  b.  Reuben  (|"-|);  by  R.  Zerachia 
Halevi  (Maor);  by  R.  Mordecai  b.  Hillel;  by  R.  Joseph  Chabiba  (Nimuke 
Joseph),  and  by  some  other  distinguished  Rabbis. 

2.  R.  Asher  b.  Jechiel  (ty"i<nn),  a  German  Rabbi,  later  in 
Toledo,  Spain,  where  he  died  in  1327,  wrote  a  compendium  alter 
the  pattern  of  that  of  Alfasi  and  embodied  in  the  same  also  the 
opinions  of  later  authorities.  This  compendium  is  appended  in 
our  Talmud  editions  to  each  Masechta,  under  the  title  of  the 
author  nU^S*  1i"'3n. 

R.  Jacob,  the  celebrated  son  of  this  author,  added  to  that 
compendium  an  abstract  of  the  decisions  contained  in  the  same, 

the  ty"i<nn  •'pD-'S  m^f'^p. 

B.     Codes. 
§  37. 

1.  Mishne  Thora  pinin  HJITD  * 'Repetition  of  the  Law",  by 
R.  Moses  Maimonides  (D' -D  n)  flourishing  in  the  XII  century. 
This  is  the  most  comprehensive  and  systematically  arranged  Code 
of  all  the  Laws  scattered  through  the  two  Talmuds,  or  resulting 
from  the  discussions  in  the  same.  Occasionally  also  the  opinions 
of  the  post  Talmudic  authorities,  the  Gaonim,  are  added. 

This  gigantic  work,  written  throughout  in  Mishnic  Hebrew 
in  a  very  lucid  and  attractive  style,  is  divided  into  fourteen 
books,  hence  its  additional  name  Sepher  Ha-yad  (i"»  having  the 
numerical  value  of  14),  and  by  way  of  distinction,  it  was  later 
called  '^Yad  Hachazaka",  the  strong  hand.  Every  book  is,  ac- 
cording to  the  various  subjects  treated  therein,  divided  into 
Halachoth,  the  special  names  of  which  are  given  at  the  head  of 
each  of  those  fourteen  books.  The  Halachoth  are  again  subdi- 
vided into  chapters  (Perakim),  and  these  into  paragraphs. 


74  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

Remark.  This  Code  is  usualy  published  in  four  large  folio  volumes, 
and  provided  with  the  following  annotations  and  commentaries: 

a.  Hasagoth  Rahed  T'DNin  niJK'n  Critical  Eemarks,  by  R. 
Abraham  h.  David,  of  Posquieres,  a  contemporary  and  antagonist  of 
Maimonides. 

b.  Migdal  Oz])]}  b^^'O,  the  Tower  of  Strength,  defending  Maimonid- 
es' Code  against  the  censures  of  the  critic  named  above,  by  Shem  Tob 
Ibn  Gaon,  of  Spain  (beginning  of  XIV  century). 

0.  Hagahoth  Maimimiyoth  nV^JID'O  mnn,  Annotations,  by  R. 
Meir  Ha-Cohe?i,  of  Narbonne  (XIV  century). 

d.  Maggid  Mishne.  a  commentary,  generally  referring  to  the 
Talmudical  sources  of  the  decisions  in  Maimonides'  Code,  by  Don 
Vidal  di  Tolosa  (XIV  century). 

e.  Khesef  Mishne  f  n J K'D  t)D3,  a  commentary  like  the  preceding, 
by  R.  Joseph  Karo,  the  author  of  the  Shulchan  Aruch   (XVI  century). 

In  some  editions  the  following  two  commentaries  are  also  ap- 
pended. 

Lechem  Mishne  HJK^  Dn!?>  by  JR.  Abraham  de  Baton,  of  Szafed, 
XVI  century. 

Mishne  Vmelech  "^^D^  HJK^,  by  Jehuda  Rosanes,  Rabbi  in  Con- 
stantinople, d.  1737. 

2.  hM^  m^D'D  (abbrev.  y'DD),  the  great  Law  book,  by  the 
Tosaphist  jR,  Moses  of  Coucy,  in  France  (XIII  century).  This 
work  arranges  the  Talmudical  law  according  to  the  613  precepts 
which  the  Rabbis  found  to  be  contained  in  the  Pentateuch,  and  is 
divided  into  ]"»ty5;  commendatory,  and  ]'»Ti«'?  prohibitory  laws. 

Remark.  A  similar  work,  but  on  a  smaller  scale,  is  pp  niVD  'D 
ip"1^D),  also  called  Amude  Golah,  by  R.  Isaac  b.  Joseph,  of  Corbeil. 
(d.  1280). 

3.  Turi'm  D"'11tD  (the  Rows  of  Laws),  by  i?.  /aco^,  son  of 
that  celebrated  R.  Asher  b.  Jechiel  who  was  mentioned  above. 
The  work  is  divided  into  four  parts,  called:  Tur  Orach  Chayim^ 
treating  of  Liturgical  Laws  ;  Tur  Yore  Dea^  treating  of 
the  Ritual  Laws  ;  Tur  Eden  Ha-ezer  on  the  Marriage 
Laws,  and  Tur  Choshen  Mishpat  on  the  Civil  Laws.  Each  of 
these  four  books  is  subdivided  according  to  subjects  under  ap- 
propriate headings,  and  into  chapters,   called  Simanim.     This 


Epitomes  and  Codifications.  75 

code  diflfers  from  that  of  Maiinonides  in  so  far  as  it  is  restricted  to 
such  laws  only  which  were  still  in  use  outside  of  Palestine,  and 
as  it  embodies  also  rules  and  customs  which  were  established 
after  the  close  of  the  Talmud.  Besides,  it  is  not  written  in  that 
uniform  and  pure  language  and  in  that  lucid  style  by  which  the 
work  of  Maimonides  is  characterized. 

Remark.  The  text  of  the  Tiirim  is  generally  provided  with  the 
commentaries  Beth  Joseph,  by  R.  Joseph  Karo,  and  Darke  Moshe,  by 
R.  Moses  Isserles. 

4.  Shulchan  Aruch^  "jliy  ]n'?ty  (the  prepared  table),  by  R. 
Joseph  Karo  (XYI  century),  the  same  author  who  wrote  the  com- 
mentaries on  the  codes  of  Maimonides  and  of  R.  Jacob  b.  Ashcr. 
Taking  the  last  mentioned  code  (Turim)  and  his  own  commentary 
on  the  same  as  basis,  and  retaining  its  division  into  four  parts  as 
well  as  that  into  subjects  and  chapters,  he  subdivided  each 
chapter  (Siman)  into  paragraphs  (D''S"'VD)  and  so  remodeled  its 
contents  as  to  give  it  the  proper  shape  and  style  of  a  law  book. 
This  Shulchan  Aruch  together  with  the  numerous  annotations 
(mn:tn)  added  to  it  by  the  contemporary  R.  Moses  Isserles  (kS"D"l) 
was  up  to  our  time  regarded  by  all  rabbinical  Jews  as  the  autho- 
ritative code  by  which  all  questions  of  the  religious  life  were 
decided. 

Remark.  The  glosses  and  commentaries  on  the  Shulchan  Aruch 
are  very  numerous.  Those  usually  printed  with  the  text  in  the  folio 
editions  are  the  following,  all  belonging  to  the  seventeenth  century: 

a.  Beer  ha-Gola,  giving  the  sources  of  that  code,  by  Moses  Ribkes 
in  Amsterdam. 

b.  Tare  Zahdb  (T"t3)  commentary  on  all  parts  of  the  code,  by  R. 
David  b.  Samuel  Halevi. 

c.  Sifihe  Cohen  (*]"tJO  on  Jore  Dea  and  Ghoshen  Mishpat,  by  R. 
Sabbathai  Cohen. 

d.  Magen  Abraham  (n"0)  on  Orach  Chayim,  by  R.  Abram 
Gumbinner. 

e.  Beth  Samuel  on  Eben  Ha-ezer  by  R.  Samuel  b.  Uri,  of  Furth. 

f.  Clielkath  Mechokek  on  Eben  Ha-ezer,  by  R.  Moses  of  Brisk. 


76  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

Constant  references  to  the  four  Codes  mentioned  above  are 
made  in  the  marginal  glosses  which  are  found  on  every  page  of 
the  Talmud,  under  the  heading  of  ''^E?i  Mishpat^  Ner  Mttzwah'\ 
It  is  the  object  of  these  glosses  to  show,  at  every  instance  when 
a  law  is  quoted  or  discussed  in  the  Talmud,  where  the  final  decision 
of  that  law  is  to  be  found  in  the  various  codes.  The  authorship 
of  these  marginal  glosses  is  ascribed  to  R.  Joshua  Boas  Baruch 
(XVI  century).  The  same  scholar  wrote  also  the  glosses 
headed  Ihora  Or  which  are  found  in  the  space  between  the 
Talmud  text  and  Rashi's  commentary,  and  which  indicate  the 
books  and  chapters  of  the  biblical  passages  quoted  in  the  Talmud, 
besides,  the  very  important  glosses  on  the  inner  margins  of  the 
pages,  headed  Massoreth  Ha-shas  (D"^n  n^lIDD)  which  give 
references  to  parallel  passages  in  the  Talmud.  The  last  mentr 
ioned  glosses  were  later  increased  with  critical  notes  by  Isaiah 
Berlin  (Pik),  Rabbi  in  Breslau  (d.  1T99). 

C.    Collections  of  the  Agadic  Portions  of  the  Talmud. 

§  38. 

While  the  above  mentioned  Corapendiums  and  Codes  are 
restricted  to  abstracting  only  the  legal  matter  (Halacha)  of  the 
Talmud,  R.  Jacob  ibn  C/^^-^/i^,  flourishing  at  the  beginning  of  the 
sixteenth  century,  collected  all  the  Agadic  passages  especially  of 
the  Babylonian  Talmud.  This  very  popular  collection  which  is 
usually  printed  with  various  commentaries  has  the  title  oiEn 
Jacob  (2pj;''  |''j;;  in  some  editions  it  is  also  called  ^snt^''  ["'j;). 

R.  Sa77iuel  /^^/f,  flourishing  in  the  latter  part  of  that  century, 
made  a  similar  Collection  of  the  Agadic  passages  of  the  Palestinian 
Talmud  with  an  extensive  commentary  under  the  title  of 
nsnD  nS''  (Vienna,  1590  and  Berlin  1125-26).  An  abridged 
edition  with  a  short  commentary  was  published  under  the  title  of 
n^'^tfi^in"'  p^'D  (Lemberg,  1860). 


CHAPTER  IX. 

MANUSCRIPTS    AND     PRINTED    EDITIONS    OF   THE 

TALMUD. 

A.    Manuscripts. 
§  39. 

In  consequence  of  the  terrible  persecutions  of  the  Jews 
during  the  Middle  Ages,  and  the  destruction  of  their  libraries, 
so  often  connected  therewith,  and  especially  in  consequence  of 
the  vandalism  repeatedly  perpetrated  by  the  Church  against 
the  Talmud,*  only  a  very  limited  number  of  manuscripts  of  the 
same  have  come  down  to  our  time.  Codices  of  single  Sedarim 
(sections)  and  Masechtoth  (tracts  or  treatises)  are  to  be  found  in 
various  libraries  of  Europe,  especially  in  the  Vatican  Library  of 
Rome,  and  in  the  libraries  of  Parma,  Leyden,  Paris,  Oxford, 
Cambridge,  Munich,  Berlin  and  Hamburg.  The  only  known 
complete  manuscript  of  the  Babylonian  Talmud,  written 
in  the  year  1369,  is  in  possession  of  the  Royal  Library  of 
Munich.  A  fragment  of  Talmud  Pesachim,  of  the  ninth  or  tenth 
century,  is  preserved  in  the  University  Library  of  Cambridge, 
and  was  edited  with  an  autotype  fascimile,  by  W.  H.  Lowe, 
Cambridge  1879. 

The  Columbia  College  in  the  city  of  New  York,  lately 
acquired  a  collection  of  manuscripts  containing  the  treatises 
Pesachim^  Moed  Katon^  Megilla  and  Zebaehi??i  of  the  Babylonian 
Talmud.  These  manuscripts  came  from  Southern  Arabia,  and 
date  from  the  year  1548.  ^ 

^  It  is  stated  that  at  the  notorious  auto-da-fe  of  the  Talmud,  held 
in  the  year  1249,  at  Paris,  twenty  four  cart-loads  of  Talmud  tomes  were 
consigned  to  the  flames.  Similar  destructions  of  the  Talmud  were 
executed  by  the  order  of  Pope  Julius  III,  in  the  year  1553,  first  at  Rome, 
then  at  Bologne  and  Venice,  and  in  the  following  year  in  Ancona  and 
other  cities.  Among  the  12,000  tomes  of  the  Talmud  that  were  burned 
at  Cremona,  in  the  year  1559  (see  Graetz  Geschichte  d.  Juden  X.  p.  3S2), 
were  undoubtedly  also  numerous  Manuscripts,  though  most  of  them 
may  have  been  printed  copies. 

'  See  Max  L.  Margolis,  "The  Columbia  College  MS.  of 
Meghilla  examined,"  New  York  1892- 


78  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

Manuscripts  of  the  MisJma  or  of  single  Sedarim  thereof, 
some  of  which  dating  from  the  thirteenth  century,  are  preserved 
in  the  libraries  of  Parma,  of  Berlin,  of  Hamburg,  of  Oxford  and 
of  Cambridge.  That  of  the  last  mentioned  library  was  edited 
by  W.  H.  Lowe  :  "  The  Mishna  on  which  the  Palestinian  Talmud 
rests,"  etc.,  Cambridge,  1883. 

Of  the  Palestinian  Talmud  the  only  manuscript,  of  consid- 
erable extent,  is  preserved  in  the  Library  of  Leyden.  See  S. 
M.  Schiller-Szinessy,  ''Description  of  the  Leyden  MS.  of  the 
Palestinian  Talmud."  Cambridge  1878.  Fragments  of  the 
Palestinian  Talmud  are  also  found  in  some  other  libraries, 
especially  in  those  of  Oxford  and  Parma. 

Fuller  information  concerning  MSS.  of  the  Talmud  is  given 
in  F.  Lebrecht's  ''Handschriften  und  erste  Ausgaben  des  Babyl. 
Talmud,"  Berlin  1862.  See  alsoM.  Steinschneider's  ''Hebriiische 
Bibliographic,"  Berlin,  1862  and  1863. 

B.     The  Talmud  in  Print. 

a.     The  Mishna  editions. 

§  40. 

Already  as  early  as  the  year  1492,  the  first  edition  of  th> 
Mishna  together  with  the  commentary  of  Maimonides  appearea 
in  Naples.  It  was  folio  vved  by  several  editions  of  Venice  (1546-50, 
and  1606),  of  Riva  di  Trento  (1559)  and  of  Mantua  (1559-63). 
In  the  last  mentioned  editions  the  commentary  of  Obadia  di 
Bertinoro  is  added.  The  editions  which  have  since  appeared 
are  very  numerous.  Those  which  appeared  since  the  seven- 
teenth century  are  generally  accompanied,  besides  Bertinoro's 
commentary,  by  tD'"'  mSDIH  by  Lipman  Heller  or  some  other 
shorter  commentaries. 

b.     The  Babylonian  Talmud. 

§  41. 

The  first  complete  edition  of  the  Babjdonian  Talmud  was 
published  by   Daniel    Bomberg  in  12   folio     volumes,    Venice 


Manuscripts  and  printed  Editions.  1^ 

1520-23.1  Besides  the  text,  it  contains  the  commentary  of  Rashi, 
the  Tosaphoth,  the  Piske-Tosaphoth,  the  compendium  of  Asheri, 
and  the  Mishna  commentary  of  Maimonides.  This  original 
edition  served  as  model  for  all  editions  which  subsequently  ap- 
peared at  Venice,  Basel,  Cracow,  Lublin,  Amsterdam,  Frank- 
fort on-the-Oder,  Berlin,  Frankfort  on-the-Main,  Sulzbach,  Dy- 
hernfurtjlrague,  Warsaw,  and  recently  at  Vienna  and  Wilna.  The 
later  editions  were  greatly  improved  by  the  addition  of  valuable 
literary  and  critical  marginal  notes  and  appendices  by  learned 
rabbis.  But  the  Basel  and  most  of  the  subsequent  editions  down 
almost  to  the  present  time,  have  been  much  mutilated  by  the 
official  censors  of  the  press,  who  expunged  from  the  Talmud  all 
those  passages  which,  in  their  opinion,  seemed  to  reflect  upon 
Christianity,  and, besides,  changed  expressions,  especially  names 
of  nations  and  of  sects,  which  they  suspected  as  having  reference 
to  Christians. ' 

The  Amsterdam  editions,  especially  the  first  (1644-48),  es- 
caped those  mutilations  at  the  hand  of  the  censors,  and  are  on 
this  account  considered  very  valuable.  Most  ofthe  passages  which 
have  elsewhere  been  eliminated  or  altered  by  the  censors,  have 
been  extracted  from  the  Amsterdam  edition,  and  published  in 
separate  small  books.  Of  these  the  following  two  may  be  menti- 
oned: m:DD*y:*nnnii'13p(s.l.)andD"tynmi1"lDn,Koenigsberg,  1860. 

A  critical  review  ofthe  complete  editions  ofthe  Babylonian 
Talmud  and  of  the  very  numerous  editions  of  single  Masechtoth 


*  Prior  to  this  first  complete  edition,  a  number  of  single  Masechtoth 
of  the  Babyl.  Talmud  had  already  been  published  by  Gershom  of 
Soncino,  between  the  years  1484  and  1519,  at  Soncino  and  at  Pesaro. 

'  Words  mostly  changed  are:  instead  of  i^J  (gentile)  ^ni3 
(a  Samaritan)  or  "•L'nD  (an  Aethiopian);  instead  of  pD  (a  heretic)  '•pn:*' 
(a  Saddiicee)  or  DITlp'SK  (an  Epicurean);  instead  of  nSJ  (an  alien,  a  Nou 
Israelite)  D""iDV  (an  idolater);  instead  of  n"1N  (the  nations  of  the  world) — 
D"b23(Babylonians)  or  D''jyj3(Canaanites);  instead  of  ^XD"n(the  Romans) 
^fc^DIN  (Syrians)  or  ^XDID  (Persians);  instead  of  ^D^-i(Rome)  '^^]jn  (the  city) 
etc. 

In  the  more  recent  editions,  however,  except  those  appearing 
under  Russian  censorship,  the  original  readings  have  mostly  been 
restored. 


80  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

since  the  year  1484,  was  published  by  Raphael  Rabbinovicz,  in 
his  Hebrew  pamphlet,  Tio^nn  nDSin  bv  ItDSD  Munich  1877.  i 

The  same  author  also  collected  and  published  very  rich  and 
important  material  for  a  critical  edition  of  the  Babylonian 
Talmud  from  the  above  mentioned  manuscript  in  the  Royal 
Library  of  Munich  and  other  manuscripts,  as  well  as  from  early 
prints  of  single  Masechtoth  in  various  libraries.  The  title  of 
this  very  extensive  work,  written  in  Hebrew,  is  Dikduke  Sopherim^ 
D"''^.S1D  •'pnpTD  with  the  Latin  title:  Yariae  lectiones  in  Mishnam 
et  in  Talmud  Babylonicum,  etc.,  Munich  1868-86.  The  fifteen 
volumes  in  octavo  which  have  appeared  of  this  valuable  work 
comprise  only  three  and  a  half  Sedarim  of  the  six  Sedarim  of  the 
Talmud.  It  is  to  be  regretted  that  in  consequence  of  the  death 
of  the  learned  author  the  completion  of  this  important  work  has 
been  suspended. 

c.     The  Palestinian  Talmud. 
§  42. 

Of  the  Palestinian  Talmud  (Jerushalmi)  only  four  complete 
editions  appeared: 

1.  The  first  edition,  published  by  Daniel  Romberg,  Yenice 
1523-24,  in  one  folio  volume,  without  any  commentary. 

2.  The  Cracow  edition,  1609,  with  a  short  commentary 
on  the  margin. 

3.  The  Krotoshin  edition,  1866,  with  a  commentary  like 
that  in  the  Cracow  edition,  but  added  to  it  are  marginal  notes, 
containing  references  to  parallel  passages  in  the  Babylonian 
Talmud,  and  corrections  of  text  readings. 

4.  The  Shitomir  edition,  1860-67,  in  several  folio  volumes, 
with  various  commentaries. 

Besides  these  four  complete  editions,  several  parts  have 
been  published  with  commentaries. 


>    This   instructive  pamphlet  is  also  reprinted  as  an  appendix  to 
vol.  VIII  of  Dikduke   Sopherim. 


CHAPTER  X. 

AUXILIARIES  TO  THE  STUDY  OF  THE  TALMUD. 
A.    Lexicons. 

§  43. 

1.  The  Aruch  (^nj^n)  by  R.  Nathan  b.  Jechiel^  of  Rome, 
flourishing  in  the  eleventh  century.  This  oldest  Lexicon  for 
both  Talmuds  and  the  Midrashim,  on  which  all  later  dictionaries 
are  based,  still  retains  its  high  value,  especially  on  account  of 
its  copious  quotations  from  the  Talmudical  literature  by  which 
many  corrupted  readings  are  corrected.  It  received  many  va- 
luable additions  ("j*in3;n  ClDID)  at  the  hand  of  Benjamin  Mussaphia 
(XYII  century).  These  additions,  generally  headed  by  the 
initials  a"i<  =  pD''J2  ^DS,  mostly  explain  the  Greek  and  Latin 
words  occurring  in  the  Talmud  and  Midrash.  The  edition  by 
M.  Landau  (Prague  1819-24,  in  five  8vo  volumes)  is  increased  by 
numerous  annotations  and  supplied  with  definitions  in  German. 
The  latest  and  best  edition  of  that  important  work  is: 

2.  Aruch  Completum  (D^ti^n  "[in^)  by  Alexander  Kohut^  vol. 
1-YIII.  Vienna  and  New  York,  1878-1892.  In  this  edition  the 
original  lexicon  of  Nathan  b.  Jechiel  is  corrected  by  collating 
several  ancient  Mss.  of  the  work,  and,  besides,  considerably 
enlarged  by  very  valuable  philological  and  critical  researches 
and  annotations. 

3.  Lexicon  Talmiidtcumhj  Joh.  i?z/^/^^/,  Basel,  1640.  Of 
this  work  written  in  Latin,  a  new  corrected  and  enlarged  edition 
was  published  by  B.  Fischer^  Leipsic,  1869-15. 

4.  Neuhebraisches  und  chald.  Wdrterbuch  ilber  die  Tal- 
mudim  und  Midrashim,  by  /.  Levy  in  four  volumes.  Leipsic 
1876-89. 

5.  A  Dictionary  of  the  Talmud  Babli  and  Yerushalmi  and 
the  Midrashic  Literature,  by  M.  Jastroiv.  London  and  New 
York,  1886-1903,  in  two  volumes. 


82  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

Remark.  There  are,  besides,  several  small  dictionaries,  mostly 
abstracts  of  the  Aruch,  and  useful  for  beginners.  Special  mention 
deserves  M.  Schulhaum,  Neuhebraisch-deutsches  Worterbuch,  Lem- 
berg,  1880. 

B.     Grammars. 

§  44. 

The  modern  works  on  the  Grammar  of  the  Mishna  have 
already  been  mentioned  above  p.  15  in  the  Note  to  the  paragraph 
speaking  of  the  Language  of  the  Mishna.  The  first  attempt  at 
compiling  a  Grammar  of  the  peculiar  dialect  of  the  Babylonian 
Gemara  was  made  by: 

S.  D.Luzzatto  m\L\^  ''Elementi  grammaticali  del  Caldeo 
Biblicoedel  dialetto  Talmudico  Babilonese".     Padua,  1865. 

Two  translations  of  this  work  appeared,  namely: 

1.  Grammatik  der  bibl.  chaldaeischen  Sprache  und  des 
Idioms  des  Talmud  Babli.  Ein  Grundriss  von  S.  D.  Luzzatto, 
mit  Anmerkungen  herausgegeben  von  M,  S.  Kriiger,  Breslau, 
18T3. 

2.  Luzzatto's  Grammar  of  the  bibl.  Chaldaic  Language  and 
of  the  idiom  of  the  Talmud  Babli,  translated  by  /.  Goldammer, 
New  York,  1876. 

Caspar  Levias.  Grammar  of  the  Aramaic  Idiom  contained 
in  the  Babylonian  Talmud.     Cincinnati,  1900. 

/.  Roseftberg.  Das  Aramaische  Yerbum  in  babyl.  Talmud. 
Marburg,  1888. 

C.    Chrestomathies. 
§  45. 

A.  B.  Ehrlich,  Rashe  Perakim,  Selections  from  the  Talmud 
and  the  Midrashim.     New  York,  1884. 

B.  Fischer.  Talmudische  Chrestomathie  mit  Anmerkungen, 
Scholien  und  Glossar.     Leipsic,  1884. 

Ph.  Lederer.  Lehrbuch  zum  Selbstunterricht  im  babyl.  Tal- 
mud, 3  parts,  Pressburg,  1881-88. 

A.  Sifiger.  ^'yv^Tx  Talmudische  Chrestomathie  fiir  den 
ersten  Unterrichtim  Talmud,  2  parts.     Pressburg,  1882. 


Auxiliaries  to  the  study  of  the  Talmud.  8J? 

D.     Introductory  Works  and  Treatises. 

a.    Older  Works. 

§  46. 

1.  Samuel  Hanagid^  of  Granada  (XI  century),  was  the  first 
to  write  an  introduction  to  the  Talmud.  Only  a  part  of  his 
work  has  come  down  to  our  time,  and  is  appended  to  the  first 
volume  of  our  Talmud  editions  under  the  heading  TiD^nn  ^^I^D- 

2.  Moses  Maimonides  opens  his  Mishna  commentary  on 
Seder  Zeraim  with  an  introduction  to  the  Talmud,  especially  to 
the  Mishna. 

This  introduction  of  Maimonides  as  well  as  that  of  Samuel 
Hanagid  have  been  translated  into  German  by  Fi?iner  in  his 
Translation  of  Talm.  Berachoth. 

3.  mrT^nD  'D  (Methodology  of  the  Talmud),  by  Satnson  of 
Chinon  (XIY  century).  Constantino  (1515),  Cremona,  (1558), 
Yerona  (1657). 

4.  D^lj;  m2"'^n,  by  Jeshua  b,  Joseph  Halevt,  of  Toledo, 
(XY  century). 

This  work  was  translated  into  Latin  by  Constantin 
L'Empereur,  under  the  title  Clavis  Talmudica.  Ley  den,  1634. 

In  the  editions  of  Yenice  (1639),  and  of  Livorno  (1792)  the 
Halichoth  01am  is  accompanied  by  two  complementary  works: 
TlD^nn  ''^^:d,  by  Joseph  Karo,andny'iaw*  p2^  by  Solomon  Algazi. 

Abstracts  of  the  works  3  and  4  are  added  to  Samuel  Hanagid's 
Mebo  Hatalmud  in  the  appendix  to  our  Talmud  editions. 

5.  «nD:in  '•^^n  Methodology  of  the  Talmud  by  Isaac 
Campa7iton,  of  Castilia  (XY  century),  published  in  Yenice  (1565) 
Mantua  (1593),  Amsterdam  (1754).  A  new  edition  was  pub- 
lished by  Isaac  Weiss,  Yienna,  1891. 

6.  nn^n  n^nn  (Methodology  of  the  Talmud),  by  Jacob 
Chagiz  (XYII  century).     Yerona  1647.  Amst.  1709. 

b.    Modern  Works  in  Hebrew. 
§  47. 
/.  Abelsohn.     niiri''  ]in:jT,  Methodology  of  the  Mishna  and 
Rules  of  Halacha.     Wilna,  1859. 


84  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

Jacob  Briill.  V^W^V^  «UC,  Introduction  to  the  Mislina;  2 
volumes.  Frankf.  o.  M.  1876-85.  Vol.  I  treats  of  the  lives  and 
methods  of  the  teachers  from  Ezra  to  the  close  of  the  Mishna, 
and  vol.  II  of  the  Plan  and  System  of  the  Mishna. 

Zebi  Hirsch  Chajes.  TlD^m  ^UD,  Introduction  to  the 
Talmud.     Lemberg,    1845. 

Z.  Frankel.  n^ti^cn  ''^m,  Hodegetica  in  Mishnam  etc., 
Leipsic,  1859.  A  little  Supplement  to  this  important  work  was 
published  under  the  title  of  "  Additamenta  et  Index  ad  librum 
Hodegetica  in  Mischnam".     Leipsic,   186Y. 

Z,  Frankel.  •'0^ti^*n\"I  ^<^2D,  Introductio  in  Talmud  Hiero- 
solymitanum.     Breslau,  1870. 

Joachim  Oppenhehn^  nit^'DH  nn^lH,  the  genesis  of  the 
Mishna.     Pressburg,  1882. 

J.  H.  Weiss,  vtrnm  nn  n*n  with  the  German  title:  Zur 
Geschichte  der  jiidischen  Tradition.  Vienna,  1871-83.  Yol  I 
and  II  treat  of  the  period  to  the  close  of  the  Mishna,  and  Vol. 
Ill  of  that  of  the  Amoraim. 

J.  Wiesner.  'Q^h'OT\^  riy^i.  Investigations  concerning 
the  origin  and  the  contents  of  the  Palestinian  Talmud.  Yienna, 
1872. 

c.    Works  and   Articles  in  Modern  Languages. 
§48. 

S.  Adler,  The  article  Talmud  in  Johnson's  Encyclopedia, 
New  York.  Reprinted  m  the  author's  collective  work  '  'Kobetz 
al  Yad".  New  York,  1886:  pp.  46-80. 

/.  6".  Block.  Einblicke  in  die  Geschichte  der  Entstehung 
der  Talmudischen  Literatur.     Yienna,  1884. 

N.  Briill.  Die  Entstehungsgeschichte  des  babyl.  Talmuds 
als  Schriftwerkes  (in  Jahrbiicher  fiirJud.  Geschichte  u.  Literatur 
II  pp.  1-123). 

Sam.  Davidson.  The  Article  Talmud  in  John  Kitto's 
Cyclopaedia. 

J.  Derenbourg,  Article  Talmud  in  Lichtenberg's  Ency" 
clopedie  des  sciences  religieuses.  Paris,  1882.  XII  pp.  1007* 
1036. 


Auxiliaries  to  the  study  of  the  Talmud.  85 

Z,  Frankel.  Beitriige  zur  Einleitung  in  den  Talmud  (in 
Monatschrift  fur  Geschichte  und  Wissenschaft  des  Judentlmms 
X,  pp.  186-194;  205-212;  258-272). 

y.  Hamburger.  Articles  Mischna  and  Tahnud  in  Real 
Eycyclopadie  fur  Bibel  und  Talmud.  Strelitz  1883.  Yol  II  pp. 
T89-798  and  1155-1167. 

D.  Hoffmann.  Die  erste  Misclina  und  die  Controversen 
der  Tanaim.     Berlin,  1882. 

B.  Pick.  Article  Talmud  in  Clintock  and  Strong's  Cyclo- 
paedia of  theological  Literature.     Yol.  X,  pp.  166-187. 

Ludw.  A.  Rosenthal,  Ueberden  Zusammenhang  der  Mischna. 
Ein  Beitrag  zu  ihrer  Entstehungs geschichte.  Strasburg,  1890. 

S.  M.  Schiller-Szimssy.  Article  Mishnah  in  Encyclopedia 
Britannica,  9th  Edition,  vol.  XYI,  and  Article  Tahnud  in  vol. 
XXIII. 

Hermann  Z.  Strack.  Einleitung  in  den  Thalmud.  Leipsic, 
1887.  This  work  of  the  celebrated  Christian  scholar  which  treats 
of  the  subject  with  thoroughness,  exactness  and  impartiality,  is 
a  reprint  of  the  article  Talmud  in  Herzog's  Real  Encyclopadie 
fiir  protestant.  Theologie.  Second  Edition,  vol.  XYIII. 
d.    Historical  Works. 

Of  modern  historical  works  which,  treating  of  the  Talmudical 
period  shed  much  light  upon  the  genesis  of  the  Talmud,  the  fol- 
lowing are  very  important: 

Julius  Furst  Kultur  und  Literaturgeschichte  der  Juden 
in  Asien  (Leipsic,  1849),  treats  of  the  Baoylonian  academies 
and  teachers  during  the  period  of  the  Amoraim. 

/.  M.  Jost.  Geschichte  des  Judenthums  und  seiner  Secten 
(Leipsic  1857-59).  Yol  II,  pp.  13-222  treat  of  the  period  from 
the  destruction  of  the  temple  to  the  close  of  the  Talmud. 

H.  Graetz.  Geschichte  der  Juden,  Yol.  lY,  second  edition, 
Leipsic,  1866.  This  volume  has  been  translated  into  English 
by  James  K.  Gutheim:  History  of  the  Jews  from  the  Downfall 
of  the  Jewish  State  to  the  conclusion  of  the  Talmud.  New 
York,  1873. 

G.  Karpeles.  Geschichte  der  judischen  Literatur.  Berlin, 
1886.  pp.  265-332. 


86  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction 

e.    Encyclopedical  Works. 
§50. 

Jsaac  Lamperonti^  physician  and  Rabbi  in  Ferrara  (XYIII 
century)  wrote  in  the  Hebrew  language  a  very  extensive  and 
useful  Encyclopedia  of  the  Talmud  and  the  Rabbinical  Decisions, 
under  the  title  of  pn^i''  inS.  Five  folio  volumes  of  this  work, 
comprising  the  letters  N*-D,were  published  at  Venice  (1750)  and 
Livorno  (1840).  The  remaining  volumes  have  lately  been 
published  in  8vo  at  Lyck  (1864-1874)  and  Berlin  (1885-1889), 
where  also  a  new  edition  of  the  former  volumes  appeared. 

Solomon  Rapaport.  ]>^D  "|ny,  an  encyclopedical  work  in 
Hebrew  of  which  only  one  volume,  containing  the  letter  j<,  ap- 
peared (Prague  1852). 

J.  Hamburger.  Real  Encyclopaedic  fiir  Bibel  und  Talmud, 
Abtheilung  II.  Die  Talmudischen  Artikel  A-Z.  Strelitz,  1883. 
Three  Supplements  to  this  valuable  work  appeared  Leipsic 
1886-92. 

f.    Some  other  Books  of  Reference. 

§  51. 

Si77ion  Peiser,  •'il^Dty  ^^^^  Onomasticon  of  Biblical  per- 
sons and  of  the  Mishna  teachers  quoted  in  the  Talmud  and  in 
Midrash  (Wandsbeck  1728). 

Malachiben  Jacob  (XYIII  century),  ''^S^D  TV  This  book 
is  a  Methodology  of  the  Talmud,  alphabetically  arranged. 
Livorno,  1767,   Berlin,  1852. 

A,  Stein.  Talmudische  Terminologie;  alphabetisch  geordnet. 
Prague,  1869. 

Jacob  Briill.  ]V^'^  tt^lH  Die  Mnemonotechnik  des  Talmud. 
Vienna,  1864. 

This  little  book  explains  the  Stmam?n,  i.  e.  the  mnemonical 
signs  and  symbols  so  often  met  with  in  the  Talmud  which  are 
intended  to  indicate  the  sequence  of  the  discussing  teachers  or 
of  their  arguments.     See  above  p.  60,  Note. 

Israel  Mash.  ]i2^"T|''^D  Rabbinical  Sentences,  alphabetically 
arranged.     Warsaw,  1874. 


Auxiliaries  to  the  study  op  the  Talmud.  87 

S.  Ph.  FrenkeL  t^*!"!^  JT*^.  Index  of  the  Agadic  passages 
of  the  Talmud.     Krotoschin,  1885. 

Moses  Halevi.  D^JV^.  Legal  and  ethical  maxims  of  the 
Talmud,  alphabetically  arranged.     Belgrade,  1874. 

Wies7ier.  Scholien,  wissenschaftliche  Forschungen  aus  dem 
Gebiete  des  babyl.  Talmud.  I  Berachothj  II  Sabbath;  III 
Erubin  and  Pesachim.     Prague,  1859-67. 


CHAPTER  XI. 

TRANSLATIONS  OF  THE  TALMUD. 
A.    The  Mishna. 
§  52. 
a.    Latin  Translations. 
The  learned  Dutch  G.  Surenhusius  published  (Amsterdam, 
1698-1703)  a  Latin  version  of  the   Mishna  and  of  the  com- 
mentaries of  Maimonides  and  Obadia  Bertinoro  with  annotations 
by  several  Christian  scholars. 

Remark.  Prior  to  this  publication  of  Surenhusius,  a  Latin  version 
of  some  single  Masechtoth  of  the  Mishna  was  published  by  various 
Christian  Scholars,  as  Sabbath  and  Erubin  by  Seb.  Schmidt  (Leipsic, 
1661);  Shekalim,  by  Joh.  Wiilfer  (Altdorf,  1680);  Aboda  Zara  o^nd.  Tamid, 
by  C.  Peringer  (Altdorf,  1680). 

b.    German  Translations. 

Johann  Jacob  Rabe.  Mishnah  iibersetzt  und  erlautert. 
Anspach,  1760-63. 

/.  M,  Jostj  the  celebrated  Jewish  historian,  published 
(Berlin  1832-34)  anew  German  translation  in  Hebrew  characters 
with  short  introductions  and  annotations,  together  with  the 
vocalized  Mishna  text  and  the  commentary  nnj  flD- 

A.  Sa?fi?nter.     Mischnajoth,vokalisirter  Text  mit  deutscher 
Uebersetzung  und  Erklarung.     Berlin,  1886 — . 
c.    English  Translations. 

W,  Walton.  Translation  of  the  treatises  Sabbath  and 
Erubin,  London,  IT  18. 

D.  A,  de  Sola  and  M.  7.  Raphall.  Eighteen  treatises  from 
the  Mishna  translated.     London,  1843. 

Joseph  Barclay  published  under  the  title  ''The  Talmud"  a 
translation  of  eighteen  treatises  of  the  Mishna  with  annotations. 
London,   18*78. 

C.    Taylor,     Sayings  of  the  Jewish  Fathers  (the  treatise 

Aboth).  Cambridge,    18Y7. 

Remark.     The  treatise  Aboth  has  been  translated  into  almost  all  of 
the  European  languages. 


Translations.  89 

B.    The  Babylonian  Talmud. 

§  53. 

To  translate  the  Mislma  is  a  comparatively  easy  task. 
Its  generally  plain  andunitorm  language  and  style  of  expression, 
and  its  compendious  character  could  easily  enough  be  rendered 
into  another  language  especially  when  accompanied  by  some 
explanatory  notes.  But  it  is  quite  different  with  the  Gemara, 
especially  the  Babylonian.  There  are,  of  course,  also  passages 
in  the  Gemara  which  offer  no  great  difficulties  to  a  translator 
who  is  sufficiently  familiar  with  the  idiom  in  which  the  original 
is  composed.  We  refer  to  the  historical,  legendary  and  homi- 
letical  portions  (Agadas)  which  the  compilers  have  interspersed 
in  every  treatise.  The  main  part  of  the  Gemara,  however,  which 
is  essentially  of  an  argumentative  character,  giving  minute 
reports  of  discussions  and  debates  on  the  law,  this  part,  so  rich 
in  dialectical  subtilities,  and  so  full  of  technicalities  and  elliptical 
expressions,  offers  to  the  translator  almost  insurmountable 
difficulties.  Here  a  mere  version  of  the  original  will  not  do; 
neither  will  a  few  explanatory  foot  notes  be  sufficient.  It  would 
sometimes  require  a  whole  volume  of  commentary  to  supplement 
the  translation  of  a  single  chapter  of  the  original,  in  order  to 
render  fully  and  clearly  the  train  of  thought  and  dialectical 
arguments  so  idiomatically  and  tersely  expressed  therein.  ^   This 


»  A  striking  analogy  to  this  difficulty  of  translating  the  legal 
discussions  of  the  Talmud  is  found  in  an  other  branch  of  legal  literature, 
as  may  be  seen  from  the  following  Note  which  a  learned  jurist 
kindly  furnished  me:  "The  Year  Books  of  the  English  Law,  sometimes 
called  the  Black  Letter  Books,  written  in  the  quaint  French  Norman, 
which  was  the  court-language  of  that  day,  have  always  been  more  or 
less  a  sealed  book,  except  to  experts  in  historical  antiquities.  By  the 
effort  of  the  Selden  Society  these  Reports  are  being  translated  from 
time  to  time  into  the  English;  but  to  the  uninitiated,  even  in  English, 
these  reports  are  gibberish,  and  none  but  those  thoroughly  versed  in 
legal  antiquities,  and  who  have  so  to  speak  imbibed  from  a  thousand 
other  sources  the  spirit  of  the  laws  of  that  day,  will  be  much  benefited 
by  this  translation.  It  will  take  volumes  of  commentary,  a  hundred 
times  more  bulky  than  the  text,  to  make  this  mine  of  Englsh  common 
law  of  any  value  to  the  general  practitioner,  not  to  speak  of  the  laity. 
"It  is  caviar  to  the  general  public." 


90  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

explains  why  the  various  attempts  at  translating  the  whole  of 
the  Babylonian  Talmud  have,  thus  far,  proven  a  failure,  so  that 
as  yet  only  comparatively  few  Masechtoth  of  this  Talmud  have 
been  translated,  and  these  translations  are  in  many  cases  not  in- 
telligible enough  to  be  fully  understood  by  the  reader  who  is  not 
yet  familiar  with  the  original  text  and  with  the  spirit  of  the 
Talmud. 

a.    Latin  Translations  of  single  masechtoth. 

Blashts  Ugolinus  published  in  volume  XIX  of  his  Thesaurus 
antiquitatum  sacrarum  (Yenice  1756)  a  translation  of  the 
Masechtoth  Zebachim  and  Menachoth,  and  in  vol.  XXY  (1762) 
the  Masecheth  Sanhedrin. 

G,  E.  Edzard  published  (Hamburg,  1705)  a  Latin  trans- 
lation of  the  first  two  Perakim  of  Aboda  Zara. 

b.    German  Translations. 

Johann  Jacob  Rabe.  Der  Tractat  Brachoth  nach  der  Hiero- 
solymitan  und  Babylonischen  Gemara  ubersetzt  uud  erlautert. 
Halle,  1777. 

C.  M.  Firmer.  Tractat  Berachoth.  Text  mit  deutscher 
Uebersetzung  und  Einleitung  in  den  Talmud.    Berlin,  1842. 

Ferd.  Christian  Ewald,  Aboda  Sarah ,  ein  Tractat  aus  dem 
Talmud  ubersetzt.  Niirenberg,   1856  and  1868. 

A.  Sajnmter,  Tractat  Baba  Mezia.  Text  mit  deutscher 
Uebersetzung  und  Erklarung.     Berlin,  1876. 

M,  Rawicz.  Der  Tractat  Megilla  nebst  Tosafoth  ins  Deutsche 
iibertragen.     Frankfort  on  the  Main,  1883. 

M.  Rawicz,  Der  Tractat  Rosch  ha-Schanah  ins  Deutsche 
iibertragen.     Frankf.  on  the  Main,  1886. 

M.  Rawicz.  Der  Tractat  Sanhedrin  iibertragen  und  mit 
erlauternden  Bemerkungen  versehen.     Frankf  1892. 

Z>.  O.  Straschun.  Der  Tractat  Taanith  ins  Deutsche  iiber- 
tragen.    Halle,  1883. 

August  Wunsche.  Der  Babyl.  Talmud  in  seinen  haggadischen 
Bestandtheilen  iibersetzt,  2  volumes.     Leipgic,  1886-88. 

Isaak  Levy,    Der  achte  Abschnitt  aus  dem  Tractate  Sabbath 


Translations.  91 

(Babli  und  Jeruschalmi)  iibersetzt  und  philologisch  behandelt. 
Breslau,  1892. 

c.  French  Tnanslations. 
/.  Michel  Rahbinowicz^  this  translator  of  several  parts  of 
the  Babyl.  Talmud  adopted  the  proper  method  in  presenting  the 
mental  labor  embodied  in  that  vTork.  In  selecting  a  treatise  for 
translation  he  followed  the  example  of  Alphasi  (see  above  p.  72) 
in  his  celebrated  epitome  of  the  Talmud,  in  omitting  all  digres- 
sions from  the  main  subject,  and  all  episodic  Agadas  which  the 
compilers  interspersed  among  the  stern  dialectical  discus- 
sions. The  main  part  thus  cleared  from  all  disturbing  and 
bewildering  by-work,  is  then  set  forth  in  a  clear  and  fluent 
translation  which  combines  correctness  with  the  noted  ease 
and  gracefulness  of  the  French  language.  Necessary  explan- 
ations are  partly  given  in  short  foot-notes,  and  partly, 
with  great  skill,  interwoven  into  the  translation  of  the  text.  An 
understanding  of  the  intricate  dialectical  discussions  is  greatly 
facilitated  by  appropriate  headings,  such  as:  Question;  Answer; 
Rejoinder;  Reply;  Objection;  Remark,  etc.  Besides,  each  treatise 
is  prefaced  by  an  introduction,  in  which  the  leading  principles 
underlying  that  part  of  the  Talmud  are  set  forth.  Of  this  lucid 
translation  the  following  parts  have  appeared: 

1.  Legislation  criminelle  du  Talmud,  containing  the  treatise 
of  Sanhedrin  and  such  portions  of  Maccoth  as  refer  to  the  punish- 
ment of  criminals.     Paris,  1876. 

2.  Legislation  civile  du  Talmud,  traduction  du  traitd 
Kethuboth.     Paris,   1880. 

3.  Nouveau  Commentaire  et  traduction  du  traits  Baba 
Kamma.      Paris,  1873. 

4.  Nouveau  Commentaire  et  traduction  du  traits  Baba 
Metzia,     Paris,  1878. 

5.  Nouveau  Commentaire  et  traduction  du  traits  Baba 
Bathra.     Paris,  1879. 

6.  La  medicine,  les  paiens  etc.  This  volume  contains  such 
portions  of  thirty  different  treatises  of  the  Talmud  as  refer  to 
medicine,  paganism,  etc.     Paris,    1879. 

M.  Schwab^     added  to  the  first  volume  of  his  French  trans- 


92  Historical  and  Literary  Introductios 

lation  of  the  Palestinian  Talmud,  (Paris,  1871)  also  a  translation 
of  Berachotli  of  the  Babyl.  Talmud. 

d.    English  Translation. 

A.  IV.  Streane.  Translation  of  the  treatise  Chagiga, 
Cambridge,  1891. 

0.     The  Palestinian  Talmud. 

§  54. 
a.    Latin  Translation. 

Blasius  Ugolinus  published  in  volumes  XYII-XXX  of  his 
Thesaurus  antiquitatum  sacrarum  (Yenice  1755-65)  the  following 
treatises  in  Latin:  Pesachim  (vol  XYII);  Shekalim,  Yoma, 
Succah,  Rosh  Hashanah,  Taanith,  Megilla,  Chagiga,  Betza, 
Moed  Katan  (vol.  XYIII);  Maaseroth,  Maaser  Sheni,  Challah, 
Orlah,  Biccurim  (vol.  XX);  Sanhedrin,  Maccoth  (vol.  XXY); 
Kiddushin,  Sota,  Kethuboth  (vol.  XXX). 

b.  German  Translations. 

Joh.  Jacob  Rabe^  besides  translating  Berachoth  in  connec- 
tion with  that  treatise  in  the  Babylonian  Gemara,  as  mentioned 
above,  published:  Der  Talmudische  Tract  at  Piah^  iibersetzt  und 
erlautert.    Anspach,  1781. 

August  Wunsche,  Der  Jerusalemische  Talmud  in  seinen 
haggadischen  Bestandtheilen  zum  ersten  Male  in's  Deutsche 
iibertragen.    Zurich,  1880. 

c.  French  Translation. 

Moise  Schwab,  Le  Talmud  de  Jerusalem  traduit  pour  la 
premiere  fois  X  volumes.     Paris,  1871-90. 

d.  English  Translation. 

M,  Schwab^  the  author  of  the  French  translation  just 
mentioned,  published  in  English:  The  Talmud  of  Jerusalem. 
Yol.  I  Berachoth.     London,  1886. 


CHAPTER  XII. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

OF  MODERN    WORKS  AND   MONOGRAPHS    ON   TaLMUDIC    SUBJECTS. 

(Arranged  with  reference  to  subjects  and  in  alphabetical 
order  of  authors). 

§  55. 
AG  AD  A. 

W.  Backer.         Die  Agada  der  Tannaiten.     Strasburg,  Als.  1884. 

««  Die  Agada    der    Babylonischen  Amoraer,    Strasburg, 

Als.  1878. 
u  Die  Agada  der    Palastinischen    Amoraer,    Strasburg, 

Als.  1891. 
S.    Back*  Die  Fabel  im  Talmud  u.  Midrasch   (in  Monatsschrift 

£.  Geschichte  u,  Wissenschaf  t  d.  Judenlhums,   XXIV, 

1875;    XXV,  1876;    XXIX    1880;    XXX,  1881;    XXXII, 

1883;  XXXIII,  1884). 
M.  Grunhaum.  Beitrage  zur  vergleichenden  Mythologie  aus  der  Hag- 

gada  (in  Zeitschrift  d,   D.  Morgenl.   Gesellschaft,  toI. 

XXXI,  1877). 
M.  Gudemann.  Mythenmischung  in  der  Haggada  (in  Monatschrift  f . 

Geschichte     u.    Wissenschaf t     d.     Judenthums,    vol. 

XXV,  1876). 
D.  Hoffmann.    Die  Antonius  Agadoth    im  Talmud  (in  Magazin   fur 

"Wissenschaft  des  Judenthums,  vol.  XIX,  1892). 

ARCHAEOLOGICAL. 
Ad.  Brull  Trachten  der    Juden    im  nachbiblischen    Alterthum 

Frankf .  on  the  M.  1873. 
Iranz  Delitzsch.   Jiidisches  Handworkerleben  zur  Zeit  Jesu,  Elangen, 

1879.     Translated  by  B.   Pick   ''Jewish  Artisan  Life." 

New  York,  18S3. 
M,  H.  Iriedlander,    Die  Arbeit  nach  Eibel  u.  Talmud.   Briinn,  1891. 


94  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

L.   Herzfeld.       Metrologische  Voruntersuchungen,  Geld  und  Gewicht 

der  Juden  bis  zum  Shluss  des  Talmuds  (in  Jahrbuch 

fur  Geschichte  der  Juden  u.  des  Judenthums,  vol.  Ill 

pp.  95-191,   Leipsic,  18633. 

Alex.  Kohut.      1st  das  Schachspiel  im  Talmud  genannt?  (Z.  d.  D.  M. 

G.  XL VI,  130-39). 
Leopold  Ldw.    Graphische  Requisiten  und  Erzeugnisse  bei  den  Juden, 
Leipsic,  1870-71. 
"  "        Die  Lebensalter  in  der  Jiid.  Literatur.  Szegedin,  1875. 

B.  ZucJcerman.   Ueber   Talmudische  Miinzen  u.   Gewichte.     Breslau, 
1862. 
*•  Das  jiidische  Maassystem.  Breslau,  1867. 

BIOGRAPHICAL. 
Sam.  Back.        Elischa  ben  Abuja,  quellenmassig  dargestellt.    Frankf. 

on  the  M.,  1891. 
A.  Blumenthal.  Rabbi  Meir,  sein  Leben  u.  Wirken.    Frankf.  1889. 
M.  Braunschweiger,    Die  Lehrer  der  Mischna,  ihr  Leben  u.  Wirken. 

Frankf.  on  the  M.,  1890. 
S.   Fessler.  Mar  Samuel,  der  bedeutendste  Amora,  Breslau,  1879. 

M.  Friedldnder.   Geschichtsbilder  aus  der  Zeit  der  Tanaiten  u.  Amoraer. 

Briinn,  1879. 
S.    Gelbhaus.      R.   Jehuda    llanasi  und  die  Redaction    der  Mischna. 

Vienna,  1876. 
D.  Hoffmann.     Mar  Samuel,  Rector  der  Academie  zu  Nahardea.  Leipsic, 

1873. 
Armand  Kaminka.    Simon  b.  Jochai  (chapter  in  the  author's  Studien 

zur  Geschichte  Galilaeas.     Berlin,  1890). 
Raphael  Levy.  Un  Tanah  (Rabbi  Meir), Etude  sur  la  vie  et  I'enseignement 

d'un  docteur  Juif  du  II  siecle.     Paris  1883. 
M.  L  Muhlfelder.    Rabh.   Ein  Lebensbild  zur  Geschichte  des  Talmud, 

Leipsic,  1873. 
J.  Spitz.  Rabban  Jochanan   b.  Sakkai,  Rector  der  Hochschule 

zu  Jabneh.     Berlin,  1883. 
J.  Trenel.  Vie  de  Hillel  1' Ancient.    Paris,  1867. 

H.  Zirndorf.  Some  Women  in  Israel  (pp.  1 19-270  portraying  distin- 
guished women  of  the  Talmudic  ago).  Philadelphia' 
1892. 


Bibliography.  ^5 

CHRONOLOGY   AND  CALENDAR. 
L.  M.  Lewisohn.  Geschichte  u.  System  des  judischen  Kalenderwesens. 

Leipsic,  1856. 
B,  Zuckermann.    Materialien  zur  Entwickelung  der  alt  judischen  Zeit- 
rechnung.  Breslau  1882. 

CUSTOMS. 
Joseph  Perles.     Die  jiidische  Hochzeit  in  nachbiblischer  Zeit.    Leipsic, 
1860. 
"  ««         Die  Leichenfeierlichkeiten  im  nachbiblischen  Juden- 

thum.    Breslau,  1861. 
Remark.    An  EngUsh  translation  of  both  of  these  two  monographs 
is  embodied  in  "Hebrew  Characteristics",  published  by  the  American 
Jewish  Publication  Society.     New  York,  1875. 

M.  Fluegel.  Gedanken  iiber  rehgiose  Brauche  und  Anschauungen. 
Cincinnati,  1888. 

DIALECTICS. 

Aaron  Hdhn.  The  Rabbinical  Dialectics.  A  history  of  Dialecticians 
and  Dialectics  of  the  Mishna  and  Talmud,  Cincinnati. 
1879. 

EDUCATION. 

Blach-Gudensberg.    Das  Paedagogischeim  Talmud.    Halberstadt.  1880. 
M.   Duschak.     Schulgesetzgebung  u.   Methodik  der  alten  Israeliten. 

Vienna,  1872. 
Sam.  Marcus.    Zur  Schul-Paedagogik  des  Talmud.    Berlin,  1866. 
Joseph  Simon.    L' education  et  1' instruction  d'apres  la  Bible  et  le  Talmud 

Leipsic,  1879. 
J.   Wiesen.         Geschichte  und  Methodik  der  Schulwesens  im  talmudi- 
schen  Alterthum.     Strasburg,  1892. 

ETHICS. 

M.  Block  Die  Ethik  der  Halacha,  Budapest,  1886. 

Herman  Cohen.     Die    Nachstenliebe    im    Talmud.      Ein    Gutachten. 

Marburg,  18S6. 
M.   Duschak.     Die  Moral  der  Evangelien  u.  des  Talmuds.    Briinn  1877. 
H,  B.  Fassel.     Tugend-und   Rechtslehre  des  Talmud.    Vienna,  1848. 


96  Historical  and  Literary  Introd  uction. 

E.  Orunebaum.  Die  Sittenlehre  des  Judenthums  andern  Bekcntnissen 

gegenuber.  Strasburg,  1878. 
M.  Gudemann.  Nachstenliebe.  Vienna,  1890. 
Alex.  Kohut.      The  Ethics  of  the  Fathers.     A  series  of  lectures.     New 

York,  1885. 
L.   Lazarus.       Zur  Charakteristik  der  talmudischen  Ethik.    Breslau, 

1877. 
Marc.  Levy.        Essai  sur  la  morale  de  Talmud.    Paris  1891. 
Luzzatto.  Israelitische    Moraltheologie,     deutsch    von  L.  E.  Igel, 

Breslau,  1870. 
S.   Schaffer,        Das  Recht  und  seine  Stellung   zur  Moral  nach  talmud- 

ischer  Sitten,  und  Rechtslehre.  Frankf .  on  the  M.,  1889. 
N,  J.  Weinstein.   Geschichtliche  Entwickelung  des  Gebotes  der  Nachsten- 
liebe  innerhalb  des  Judenthums,   kritisch  beleuchtet. 

Berlin,  1891. 

EXEGESIS. 

H.  S.  Hirschfeld.     Halachische  Exegese.      Berlin,  1840. 
"  "  Die  Hagadische  Exegese.     Berlin,  1847. 

S,  Waldberg.  Darke  Hashinnuyim,  on  the  methods  of  artificial  inter- 
pretation of  Scriptures  in  the  Talmud  and  Midrash. 
(in  Hebrew)  Lemberg,  1870. 

GEOGRAPHY  AND  HISTORY. 
A.  Berliner.        Beitrage  zur  Geographie  u.  Ethnographie   Babyloniens 

im  Talmud  u.  Midrasch.     Berlin  1888. 
J.  Derenhourg.  Essai  sur  I'histoire   et  la   geographie  de  la  Palestine 

d'apres  les  Talmuds  et  les  autres  sources  rabbiniques. 

Paris,  1867. 
H.  Hildesheimer,     Beitrage  zur  Geographie  Palastinas.     Berlin,  1886. 
Armand  Kaminha.    Studien  zur  Geschichte  Galilaeas.     Berlin,  1890. 
Ad.  Neuhauer.    La  geographic  du  Talmud.    M^moire    couronn6  par 

Tacad^mie  des  inscriptions  et  belles-lettres.  Paris,  1868. 

LAW. 

a.    In  General. 

Jacques  Levy.  La  jurisprudence  du  Pentateuque  et  du  Talmud. 
Constantine.  1879. 


Bibliography. 


01 


S.   Schaffer. 


L   M.    Wise. 


J,  Selden^ 


E.  Hoffmann. 


S.  Mayer,  Die    Rechte    der    Israeliten,    Athener    und    Romer. 

Leipsic,  1862-66. 

J.  L.  Saalschutz.  Das  Mosaische  Recht,  nebst  den  vervoUstandigenden 
thalmudisch-rabbinischen  Bestimmungen.  2-nd  Edi- 
tion.    Berlin,  1853. 

Das  Recht  u.  seine  Stellung  zur  Moral  nach  talmudischer 
Sitten-und  Kechtslehre.     Frankf.  on  the  M.,  1889. 
The  Law  (in  the  Hebrew  Review,  Vol.  I  pp.    12-32. 
Cincinnati,  1880). 

b.  Judicial  Courts. 
De  Synedriis  et  praefecturis  jnridicis  veterum  Ebrae- 
orum.    London,  1650;  Amsterd.  1679;    Frankf.,  1696. 
Der  oberste  Gerichtshof  in  der  Stadt  des  Heiligthums. 
Berlin,  1878. 

c.  Evidence  in  Law. 

I.  Blumenstein.  Die  verschiedenen  Eidesarten  nach   mosaisch-talmud- 
ischem  Rechte.     Frankf.  on  the  M.,  1833. 
Der  Gerichtliche  Beweis  nach  mosaischtalmudischem 
Rechte.     Berlin,  1846. 
"Miggo"  als  Rechtsbeweis  im  bab.  Talm.    Leipsic,  1891. 

d.    Criminal  Law. 

Das  Gesetz  liber  falsche  Zeugen,  nach  Bibel  u.  Talmud. 

Berlin,  1862. 

The  Criminal  Code  of  the  Jews.    London,  1880. 

Das  mosaisch-talmudische  Straf  recht.     Vienna,   1869. 

Das  peinliche    Rechtsverfahren  im    jud.    Alterthum. 

Heidelberg,  1870. 

Das  Vergeltungsprinzip  im  bibl.  u.  talmudischen  Straf- 

recht  (in  Zeitschrift  fiir  Wisseiischaft  d.  J.  Vol.  XIX. 
S,  Mendelsohn.  The  Criminal  Jurisprudence  of  the  ancient  Hebrews 

compiled   from    the    Talmud     and    other    rabbinical 

writings.     Baltimore,  1891. 
Julius  Vargha.  Defense  in  criminal  cases  with  the  ancient  Hebrews, 

translated  from  the  first  chapter  of  the  author's  large 

work  "Vertheidigungin  Criminalfallnn",  and  publisch- 

ed  in  the  Hebrew  Review,  Vol.  I  pp.  254-268.  Cincinnati, 

1880. 


Z.  Frankel. 

D.  Fink, 

O.  Bohr, 

P.  B.  Benny. 
M.  Duschak. 
J.  Furst. 

E.  Qoitein, 


98 


Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 


Thonisson. 


M.  Block, 


H.  B.  Fassel. 


L.  Auerbach. 
S.  Keyzer, 


I.    Wiesner.        Der  Bann  in  seiner  geichiclitlichen   Entwickelung  auf 

dem  Boden  des  Judentlmras.     Leipsic,   1864. 

La  peine  de  mort  dans  le  Talmud.     Brussels,  1888. 
e.     Civil  Law. 

Die  Civilprocess'Ordnung  nach.  mosaisch-rabbinischem 

Rechte.     Budapest.  1882. 

Das  mosaisch-rabbinische  Civili'echt.     Gr.    Kanischa, 

1853-54. 

Das  mosaisch-rabbinische    Gerichtsverfahren  in  civll- 

rechtlischen  Sachen.     Gr,  Kanischa,  1859. 

Das  judische  Obligation srecht.     Berlin,  1871. 
Dissertatio  de  tutela  secundum  jus  Talmudicum.  Ley  den 

1847. 
f.    Inheritance  and  Testament. 
L.   Bodenheimer.     Das  Testament.     Crefeld,  1847. 
Eduard  Gans.    Grundziige    des    mosaisch-talmudischen  Erbrechts  (in 

Zunz'  Zeitschrif  t  f  iir  die  Wissenschaf  t  des  Judenthums 

p.  419  sq.). 
Moses  Mendelssohn.     Ritualgesetze   der  Juden,  betreffend  Erbschaften 

Vormundscbaft,    Testamente   etc.     Berlin,    1778,  and 

several  later  editions. 

De   Successionibus  in  bona  defuncti  ad  leges  Hebrae 

orum.     London,   1616;  Frankf.,  1696. 
g.    Police  Law. 

Das    mosaisch-talmudische     Polizeirecht.     Buda  Pest, 

1878.     Transated  into  English  by  I.  W.  Lilienthal  in  the 

Hebrew  Review  Vol.  I,  Cincinnati  1881. 

h.    Law  of  Marriage  and  Divorce. 

Die  Familie  nach  mos.-talmud.  Lehre.     Breslau,  1867. 

Das  mosaisch-talmudische  Eberecht.     Vienna,  1864. 

Grundlinien  des  mosaisch-talmud.  Eherechts.     Breslau, 

1860. 

Die  Autonomic   der    Rabbinen  und  das    Princip  der 

jtidischen  Ehe.     Schwerin,  1847. 
L.  lAchtschetn.  Die    Ehe    nach   mosaisch-lalm.    Auffassung.     Leipsic, 

1879. 


Joh.  Selden. 


M.   Block, 


P.  Buchholz. 
M.  DuschaJc. 
Z.   Frankel. 

S.  Holdheim, 


Bibliography. 


99 


M,  Mielziner.  The  Jewish  Law  of  Marriage  and  Divorce  in  ancient 
and  modern  times,  and  its  relation  to  the  law  of  the 
State.     Cincinnati,  1884. 

Joh.  Selden.  Uxor  Ebraica  sive  de  nuptiis  et  divortiis  etc.  London, 
1646. 

J.  Stern,  Die  Frau  im  Talmud.    Ztirich,  1879. 

i.    Laws  Concerning  Slavery. 

M.  Mielziner.     Verhaltnisse  der  Sklaven  bei  den  alten  Hebrftern  nach 
biblischcn  und  talmudischen    Quellen,    Copenhagen, 
(Leipsic),  1859. 
An  English  translation  of  this  treatise  was  publiBhed  by  Prof.  H. 
L  Schmidt  in  the  Gettysburg  Evang.   Review   vol  XIII,   No  51,  and 
reprinted  in  the  Am.  Jew's  Annual.     Cincinnati,  1886. 
I.    Winter.  Stellung  der  Sklaven  bei  den  Juden.     Breslau,  1886. 

Zadok-Kahn.      L'esclavage  selon  la  Bible  et  le  Talmud.    Paris,  1867, 
"         ««  Sklaverei  nach  Bibel  u.  Talmud.    Deutsch  von  Singer. 

Berlin,  1888. 

LINGUISTICS. 

A.   Berliner.       Beitrage  zur  hebraischen    Grammatik  im  Talmud  u. 

Midras«h.     Berlin,  1879. 
Ad.  BriXll  Fremdsprachliche  Redensarten  u.  Worter  in  den  Tal- 

muden  u.  Midraschim.    Leipsic,  1869. 
JV.  Briill.  Fremdsprachliche  Worter  in  den  Talmuden  u.  Midra- 

schim (in  Jahrbiicher  fiir  jtid.  Geschichteu.  Literatur  I, 

123  220).     Frankf.  o.  M.,  1874. 
Jos.  Perles.  Etymologische    Studien  zur  Kunde  der    rabbinischen 

Sprache  und  Alter thiimer.     Breslau,  1871. 
O.  RiXlf.  Zur  Lautlehre  der   aramaisch-talmudischen  Dialocte. 

Breslau,  1879. 
Mich.   Sachs,      Beitrage      zur  Sprach-und  Alterthumsforschung.    3 

volumes.     Berlin,  185:;;-uu. 

MATHEMATICS. 
B.Zuckermm        '^bb      athematische  im   Talmud.    Beleuchtung  und 
El&ut)  ung  der  Talmudetellen  mathematischen  Inhalts. 
^realau,  1878. 


100  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

MEDICINE,   SURGERY  etc. 
Jos.  Bergel.         Die  Medizin  der  Talmudisten.     Leipsic,  1885. 
Joach.  Halpern.  Beitrage  zur  Geschichte  der  talm.  Chirurgie.  Breslau, 
1869. 

A,  H.  Israels.    Collectanea     Gynaecologica    ex  Talmude   Babylonico. 

Groningen,  1845. 
L,  Katzenelsson.  Die  Osteologie  der   Talmudisten.    Eine    talmudisch- 
anatonische  Studie  (in  Hebrew).     St.  Petersbourg,  188*^. 

B,  I.  Wunderbar.    Biblisch  -  talmudische     Medicin,   2  volumes.     Riga 

(Leipsic),  1850-60. 
NATURAL    HISTORY    AND  SCIENCES. 
Jos.  Bergel,      Studien  uber  die  naturwissenschaftlichen  Kenntnisse  der 

Talmudisten.     Leipsic,   1880. 
M.  Duschak.      Zur  Botanik  des  Talmud.     Buda  Pest,  1870. 
L.  Lewysohn.    Die  Zoologie  des  Talmuds.    Frankf.  on  the  M.,  1858. 
1mm.   Low,         Aramaische  Pflanzennamen.     Leipsic,  1881. 

PARSEEISM  IN  THE  TALMUD. 
Alexander  Kohut.    Was  hat  die  talm.  Eschatologie  aus  dem  Parsismus 
aufgenommen?  (in  Z.  d.  D.  M.  G.  vol.  XXI  pp    553-91). 
•*  •*    Die  jiidische  Angelologie  und  Daemonologie  in  ihrer 

Abhangigkeit  vom  Parsismus.     Leipsic,  1866. 
"  *'    Die    talmudisch  -  midraschische    Adamssage     in   ihrer 

Rtickbeziehung   auf  die  pers.    Yima  und   Meshiasage, 
in  Z.  d.  D.  M.  G.  XXV  pp.  59-94. 
**  "    Die  Namen  der  pers,  u.  babylonischen  Feste  im  Talmud 

(in  Kobak's  Jeschurun,   vol.  VIII,   49-64).    The  same 
subject  in  Revue,  des  Etudes  Juives,  Vol.  XXIV, 
POETRY. 
S.  SeJcles,  The  Poetry  of  the  Talmud.    New  York,  1880. 

PROVERBS,  MAXIMS,  PARABLES. 
L.   Dukes.  Rabbinische  Biumenlese.     Leipsic,  1844. 

"         **  Rabbinische  Spruchkunde.     Vienna,  1851. 

J.  R.  Filrstenthal.     Rabbinische  Anthologie.     Breslau,  1834. 
Giuseppe  Levi.    Parabeln,     Legenden   u.    Gedanken    aus    Talmud   u. 
Midrasch,aus  dem  Italienischen  ins  Deutsche  tibetragen 
von  L.  Seligmann.     Leipsic,  1863. 
L^wenstein.        Sentenzen,  Spriiche  u.  Lebensregeln  aus  dem  Talmud^ 
Berlin,  1887. 


Bibliography.  101 

PSYCHOLOGY, 
if.  Jacobson,     Veriuch    einer   Psychologie    des  Talmud.    Hamburg, 

1878. 
J.  Wiesner,         Zur  talmudischen  P8jchologie(in  Magazin  ftlr  jtidische 
Geschichte  und  Literatur,  Vol.  I,  1874,  and  II,  1876}. 

RELIGIOUS  PHILOSOPHY  AND  HISTORY. 

M.  Friedldnder.  Ben  Dosa  und  seine  Zeit,  oder  Einfluss  der  heidnischen 
Philosophie  auf  das  Judenthum  u.  Christenthum. 
Prague,  187a. 

M.  Oudemann.     Religionsgeechichtliche  Studien.     Leipsic,  18''6. 

M.  Joel.  Blicke  in  die   Religion sgeschichte  zu  Anfang  des  II 

Jahrhunderts.     Breslau,  1880. 

A,  Nager,  Die    Religionsphilosophie  des  Talmud.     Leipsic,  1864. 

SUPERNATURALISM  AND  SUPERSTITION. 

Gideon  Brecher.    Das  Transcendentale,  Magik  und  magische  Heilarten 

im  Talmud.     Vienna,  1850. 
David  Joel.        Der  Aberglaube  und  die  Stellung  des  Judenthums  zu 

demselben.     2  parts.     Breslau,  1881-83. 
Alex.  Kohut.      Jiidische  Angelologie  u.  Daemonologie  in  ihrer  Abhan- 

gigkeit  vom  Parsismus.    Leipsic,  1866. 
Sal.  Thein.        Das   Princip  des  planetarischon   Einflusses   nach  der 

Anschauung  des  Talmud.     Vienna,  1876. 
S.  Wolffsohn.    Oneirologie  im  Talmud,  oder  der  Traum  nach  Auffas- 

sung  des  Talmuds.    Breslau,  1874. 

POPULAR  TREATISES  AND  LECTURES  ON  THE  TALMUD. 

Tobias  Cohn.     Der  Talmud.     Ein  Vortrag.    Vienna,  1866. 

Emanuel  Deutsch.    What  is  the  Talmud?    (in  the  Quarterly  Keriew  for 

October,    1867,   reprinted    in  the    Literary     Remains, 

New  York,  1874). 
M.  Ehrentheil.    Der  Geist  des  Talmud.    Breslau,  1887. 
Karl  Fischer.     Gutmeinung  iiber  den  Talmud.     Vienna,  1888. 
Sams.  Raph.  Hirsch.    Beziehung  des  Talmuds  zum  Judeuthum  und  zur 

sozialen  Stellung  seiner  Bekenner.     Frankf.  o.  M.,  1884. 
P.  I.  Hershon.    Talmudic  Miscellany.     London,  1880. 


102 


Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 


p.  L.  Hershon.   Treasures  of  the  Talmud.    London,  1882. 

Abram  S.  Isaacs.     Stories  from  the  Rabbis.     New  York.  1893. 

A.  Jellinek  Der  Talmud.     Zwei  Reden.    Vienna,  1865. 

Der  Talmndjude.    4  Reden.     Vienna,  1883-83. 
Gutachten  liber  den  Talmud.     Breslau,  1877. 
Der  wahre  Talmudjude.     Die  wichtigsten    Grundsatze 
des  talmudischen  Schriftthums  iiber  das  sittliche  Leben 
desMenschen.     Berlin,  1893. 

Die  Wahrheit  iiber  den  Talmud,  (aus  dem  Franzosischen 
"La  verite  sur  le  Talmud",  iibersetzt  von  S.  Mannheimer, 
Basel,  1860. 

La  Controverse  sur  le  Talmud  sous  Saint  Louis,  Paris, 
1881. 

The  Talmud,  Selections  from  the  contents  of  that  an- 
cient book.     London,  1876. 

Ludwig  Philippson.  Zur  Characttristik  des  Talmuds  (in  *' Welt- 
be  wegende  Fragen".  Vol.  II,  pp.  349-416.  Leipsic, 
1869). 

JEJm.  Schreiber.  The  Talmud.     A  series  of  (4)  Lectures.    Denver,  1884. 

L.   Stern.  Ueber  den  Talmud.     Vortrag.  Wurzburg,  1875. 

J.   Stern.  Lichtstrahlen  aus  dem  Talmud.     Zurich,  1883. 

A.  A.  Wolff.  Talmudf jender  (the  Enemies  of  the  Talmud),in  Danish. 
Copenhagen,  1878. 

August  Wunsche.    Der  Talmud.    Eine  Skizze.    Zurich,  1879. 


M.  Joel. 
Albert  Katz. 


S.   Klein. 


Isidore  Loeb. 


H.  Polano. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

OPINIONS  ON  THE  VALUE  OF  THE  TALMUD. 

§  57. 

No  literary  monument  of  antiquity  has  ever  been  subject  to 
so  different  and  opposite  views  and  opinions,  as  the  Talmud.  Its 
strict  followers  generally  loo  ked  upon  it  as  the  very  embodiment 
of  wisdom  and  sagacity,  and  as  a  work  whose  authority  was 
second  only  to  that  of  the  Bible.  In  the  non-Jewish  literature 
it  was  often  decried  as  ''one  of  the  most  repulsive  books  that 
exist",  as  ''a  confused  medley  of  perverted  logic,  absurd  subtile- 
ties,  foolish  tales  and  fables,  and  full  of  profanity,  superstition 
and  even  obscenity",  or  at  the  most,  as  ''an  immense  heap  of 
rubbish  at  the  bottom  of  which  some  stray  pearls  of  Eastern 
wisdom  are  hidden." 

It  is  certain  that  many  of  those  who  thus  assumed  to  pass 
a  condemning  judgment  upon  the  gigantic  work  of  the  Talmud 
never  read  nor  were  able  to  read  a  single  page  of  the  same  in  the 
original,  but  were  prompted  by  religious  prejudice  and  antag- 
onism, or  they  based  their  verdict  merely  on  those  disconnected 
and  often  distorted  passages  which  Eisenmenger  and  his  consorts 
and  followers  picked  out  from  the  Talmud  for  hostile  purposes. 

Christian  scholars  who  had  a  deeper  insight  into  the  Talmud- 
ical  literature,  without  being  blinded  by  religious  prejudices, 
expressed  themselves  quite  differently  on  the  character  and  the 
merits  of  that  work,  as  may  be  seen  from  the  following  few 
quotations. 

Johann  Buxiorf,  in  the  preface  to  his  Lexicon  Chald.  et 
Talmudicum,  says:  "The  Talmud  contains  many  legal,  medical, 
physical,  ethical,  political,  astronomical,  and  other  excellent 
documents  of  sciences,  which  admirably  commend  the  history  of 
that  nation  and  time;  it  contains  also  luminous  decisions  of  an- 
tiquity; excellent  sayings;  deep  thoughts,  full  of  grace  and  sense; 
and  numerous  expressions  which  make  the  reader  not  only  better, 
but  also  more  wise  and  learned,    and  which,  like  unto  flashing 


f  04  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

jewels,  grace  the  Hebrew  speech  not  less  than  all  those  Greek 
and  Roman  phrases  adorn  their  languages." 

Other  favorable  opinions  expressed  by  Christian  scholars  of 
the  sixteenth  to  eighteenth    centuries    are    collected  in   Karl 
Fischer's  '  'Gutmeinung  iiber  den  Talmud  der  Hebraer. "    Vienna, 
1883. 

Of  such  scholars  as  belong  to  our  time,  the  following  may  be 
quoted  here. 

The  late  Pro/,  Delitzsch  in  his  '•'' Jiidisches  Handwerkerleben 
zur  Zeit  Jesu'^  says: 

* 'Those  who  have  not  in  some  degree  accomplished  the 
extremely  difficult  task  of  reading  this  work  for  themselves,  will 
hardly  be  able  to  form  a  clear  idea  of  this  polynomical  colossus. 
It  is  an  immense  speaking-hall,  in  which  thousands  and  tens  of 
thousands  of  voices,  of  at  least  Ave  centuries,  are  heard  to  com- 
mingle. A  law,  as  we  all  know  from  experience,  can  never  be 
so  precisely  formulated  that  there  does  not  remain  room  for 
various  interpretations;  and  question  upon  question  constantly 
arises  as  to  the  application  of  it  to  the  endless  multiplicity  of  the 
existing  relations  of  life.  Just  imagine  about  ten  thousand 
decrees  concerning  Jewish  life  classified  according  to  the  spheres 
of  life,  and  in  addition  to  these,  about  five  hundred  scribes  and 
lawyers,  mostly  from  Palestine  and  Babylon,  taking  up  one  after 
another  of  these  decrees  as  the  topic  of  examination  and  debate, 
and,  discussing  with  hair-splitting  acuteness,  every  shade  of  mean- 
ing and  practical  application;  and  imagine,  further,  that  the  fine- 
spun thread  of  this  interpretation  of  decrees  is  frequently  lost  in 
digressions,  and  that,  after  having  traversed  long  distances  of  such 
desert-sand,  you  find,  here  and  there,  an  oasis,  consisting  of 
sayings  and  accounts  of  more  general  interest.  Then  you  may 
have  some  slight  idea  of  this  vast,  and  of  its  kind,  unique,  juridic 
codex,  compared  with  whose  compass  all  the  law-books  of  other 
nations  are  but  Lilliputians,  and  beside  whose  variegated,  buzzing 
market  din,  they  represent  but  quiet  study-chambers." 

y.  Alexander^  in  his  book  on  The  Jews]  their  Past^  Present 
and  Future  (London,    18Y0),  says: 


Opinions  on  the  value  of  the  Talmud.  105 

''The  Talmud,  as  it  now  stands,  is  almost  the  whole  literature 
of  the  Jews  during  a  thousand  years.  Commentator  followed 
upon  commentator,  till  at  last  the  whole  became  an  immense 
bulk;  the  original  Babylonian  Talmud  alone  consists  of  294Y  folio 
pages.  Out  ol  such  literature  it  is  easy  to  make  quotations  which 
may  throw  an  odium  over  the  whole.  But  fancy  if  the  production 
of  a  thousand  years  of  English  literature,  say,  from  the  ^'History" 
of  the  venoi-able  Bedeto  Milton's  ''Paradise  Lost,"  were  thrown 
together  into  a  number  of  uniform  folios,  and  judged  in  like  man- 
ner; if  because  some  superstitions  monks  wrot«  silly  "Lives  of 
Saints,"  therefore  the  works  of  John  Bunyan  should  also  be 
considered  worthless.  The  absurdity  is  too  obvious  to  require 
another  word  from  me.  Such,  however,  is  the  continual  treat- 
ment the  Talmud  receives  both  at  the  hand  of  its  friends  and  of 
its  enemies.  Both  will  find  it  easy  to  quote  in  behalf  of  their 
preconceived  notions,  but  the  earnest  student  will  rather  try  to 
weigh  the  matter  impartially,  retain  the  good  he  can  find  even  in 
the  Talmud,  and  reject  what  will  not  stand  the  test  of  God's  word. " 

Tne  impartial  view  of  the  Talmud  taken  by  modern  Jewish 
scholars  may  be  seen  from  the  following  opinion  expressed  by 
the  late  Prof,  Graetz  in  his  "History  of  the  Jews"  (vol.  lY. 
308  sq.). 

'<The  Talmud  must  not  be  considered  as  an  ordinary  literary 
work  consisting  of  twelve  folios;  it  bears  not  the  least  internal 
resemblance  to  a  single  literary  production;  but  forms  a  world 
of  its  own  which  must  be  judged  according  to  its  own  laws.  It 
is,  therefore,  extremely  difficult  to  furnish  a  specific  sketch  of  the 
Talmud,  seeing  that  a  familiar  standard  or  analogy  is  wanting. 
And  however  thoroughly  a  man  of  consummate  talent  may  have 
penetrated  its  spirit  and  become  conversant  with  its  peculiarities, 
he  would  scarcely  succeed  in  such  a  task.  It  may,  in  some 
respects,  be  compared  with  the  Patristic  literature,  which  sprang 
up  simultaneously.  But  on  closer  inspection,  this  comparison 
will  also  fail.... 

The  Talmud  has  at  difibrent  times  been  variously  judged 
on  the  most  heterogeneous  assumptions;  it  has  been  condemned 
and  consigned  to  the  flames,  simply  because  it  was  presente 


106  Historical  and  Ltteraey  Intrduction. 

in  its  unfavorable  aspect  without  taking  into  consideration  its 
actual  merits.  It  cannot  be  denied  that  the  Babylonian  Tal- 
mud labors  under  some  defects,  like  any  other  mental  product, 
which  pursues  a  single  course  with  inexorable  consistency  and 
undeviating  dogmatism.  These  defects  may  be  classified  under 
four  heads:  the  Talmud  contains  some  unessential  and  trivial 
subjects,  which  it  treats  with  much  importance  and  a  serious 
air;  it  has  adopted  from  its  Persian  surroundings  superstitious 
practices  and  views,  which  presuppose  the  agency  of  interme- 
diate spiritual  beings,  witchcraft,  exorcising  formulas,  magical 
cures  and  interpretations  of  dreams  and,  hence,  axe  in  conflict 
with  the  spirit  of  Judaism;  it  further  contains  several  uncharit- 
able utterances  and  provisions  against  members  of  other  na- 
tions and  creeds;  lastly  it  favors  a  bad  interpretation  of  Scrip- 
ture, absurd,  forced  and  frequently  false  commentations.  For 
these  faults  the  whole  Talmud  has  been  held  responsible  and 
been  denounced  as  a  work  devoted  to  trifles,  as  a  source  of  im- 
morality and  trickery,  without  taking  into  consi'loration,  that 
it  is  not  a  work  of  a  single  author  who  must  be  rcrtponsible 
for  every  word,  and  if  it  be  so,  then  the  whole  Jewish  people 
was  its  author.  Over  six  centuries  are  crystallized  in  the  Tal- 
mud with  animated  distinctness,  in  their  pecuUar  costumes, 
modes  of  speech  and  of  thought,  so  to  say  a  literary  Herculaneum 
and  Pompeii,  not  weakened  by  artistic  imitation,  which  trans- 
fers a  colossal  picture  to  the  narrow  limits  of  a  miniature.  It  is, 
therefore,  no  wonder,  if  in  this  world  sublime  and  mean,  great 
and  small,  serious  and  ridiculous,  Jewish  and  heathen  elements, 
the  altar  and  the  ashes,  are  found  in  motley  mixture.  Those 
odious  dicta  of  which  Jew-haters  have  taken  hold,  were  in 
most  cases  nothing  else  but  the  utterances  of  a  momentary  in- 
dignatian,  to  which  an  individual  had  given  vent  and  which  were 
preserved  and  embodied  in  the  Talmud  by  over-zealous  disci- 
ples, who  were  unwilling  to  omit  a  single  expression  of  the 
revered  ancients.  But  these  utterances  are  richly  counterbal- 
anced by  the  maxims  of  benevolence  and  philanthropy  towards 
every  man,  regardless  of  creed  and  nationality,  wliich  are  also 
preserved  in  the  Talmud.     As  counterpoise  to  the  rank  super- 


Opinions  on  the  value  of  the  Talmud.  107 

stition,  there  are  found  therein  sharp  warnings  against  supersti- 
tious, heathen  practices  (Darke  Emori),  to  which  subject  a 
whole  section,  under  the  name  oi  PereJz  Emorai^  is  devoted,  i 

''The  Babylonian  Talmud  is  especially  characterized  and 
distinguished  from  the  Palestinian,  by  high-soaring  contempla- 
tions, a  keen  understanding,  and  Hashes  of  thought  which  fit- 
fully dart  through  the  mental  horizon.  An  incalculable  store 
of  ideas  and  incentives  to  thinking  is  treasured  in  the  Talmud, 
init  not  in  the  form  of  finished  themes  that  may  be  appropriated 
i.i  a  semi-somnolent  state,  but  with  the  fresh  coloring  of  their 
iiieeption.  The  Babylonian  Talmud  leads  into  the  laboratory 
of  thought,  and  its  ideas  may  be  traced  from  their  embryonic 
motion  up  to  a  giddy  height,  whither  they  at  times  soar  into  the 
region  of  the  incomprehensible.  For  this  reason  it  became, 
more  than  the  Jerusalemean,  the  national  property,  the  vital 
breath,  the  soul  of  the  Jewish  people ". 

Why  study  the  Talmud  ? 

§58. 

Some  years  ago,  the  author  addressed  the  Classes  of  the 
Hebrew  Union  College  on  this  question.  An  abstract  of  that 
address  may  find  here  a  proper  place  for  the  benefit  of  younger 
students : 

Upon  resuming  our  labors  for  a  new  scholastic  year,  I  wish 
to  address  the  students  regarding  that  branch  of  instruction 
which  I  have  the  privilege  of  teaching  in  the  collegiate  classes 
of  this  institution.  I  wish  to  answer  the  question: 

FOR  WHAT  PURPOSE  DO  WE  STUDY  THE  TALMUD? 

There  was  a  time — and  it  is  not  so  very  long  since  it  passed 
l3y — there  was  a  time  when  such  a  question  would  scarcely 
have  entered  into  the  mind  of  one  who  was  preparing  for  the 
Jewish  ministry.  For  tlie  Talmud  wis  then  still  regarded  as 
the  embodiment  of  all  religious  knowledge  a'l  1  Jewish  lore. 
Its  authority  was  considered  second  only  to  that  of  the  Bible, 
its  study  regarded  as  a  religious  service,  a  God-pleasing  work  in 


»    Sabbath  66a;  Toseptha  ch.  VII,  VIII. 


108  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

which  all  pious  and  literate  men  in  Israel  were  engaged,  even 
those  who  did  not  aspire  to  a  rabbinical  office.  He,  to  whom 
the  Talmud  was  a  terra  incognita  was  looked  upon  as  an  Am 
Ha'aretSj  a  rustic  and  illiterate  man,  who  had  no  right  to  ex- 
press an  opinion  in  religious  matters.  How  then  could  he  who 
wanted  to  become  a  religious  guide  and  leader  in  Israel  ask, 
for  what  purpose  is  the  Talmud  to  be  studied  ?  The  Talmudic 
literature  was  the  very  source  of  the  Jewish  law.  )ij  it  all 
conditions  of  the  religious  and  moral  life  were  ordered.  How 
could  a  rabbi  expect  to  be  able  to  answer  and  decide  the  many 
religious  questions  laid  before  him  daily,  without  a  thorough 
acquaintance  with  that  source  ? 

But  it  is  quite  different  in  our  time,  which  looks  upon  the 
Talmud  with  less  reverential  eyes.  The  mere  study  of  its  lite- 
rature is  not  any  longer  considered  a  religious  act  that  secures 
eternal  bliss  and  salvation;  neither  is  the  Talmud  any  longer 
regarded  as  the  highest  authority  by  whose  dicta  questions  of 
religion  and  conscience  are  to  be  finally  decided. 

Of  what  use  is  the  study  of  the  Talmud  in  our  time  ?  Is  it 
nowadays  absolutely  necessary  even  for  the  Jewish  theologian, 
ibr  a  Jewish  minister,  to  cultivate  this  hard  and  abstruse  branch 
of  literature  ?  Would  it  not  be  more  useful  if  our  students  in- 
stead of  devoting  a  part  of  their  valuable  time  to  this  obsolete 
and  antiquated  study  would  apply  it  to  some  other  branch  of 
knowledge  which  is  of  more  import  to,  and  has  more  bearing 
upon  the  present  time? 

It  sometimes  seemed  to  me  as  if  I  could  read  this  question 
from  the  faces  of  some  of  our  students  during  the  Talmudic  in- 
struction, especially  when  we  just  happened  to  have  before  us 
some  abstruse  passages  in  the  Talmud  in  which  seemingly  quite 
indifferent  and  trifling  subjects  are  minutely  treated  in  lengthy 
discussions,  or  where  the  whole  train  of  thought  widely  differs 
from  modern  conception  and  modern  ways  of  thinking. 

Nay,  I  have  even  heard  such  a  question  from  the  lips  of 
men  who  take  great  interest  in  our  college,  of  earnest  and  judi- 
cious men  who  are  highly  educated  and  versed  in  our  literature 
and  who  themselves  in  their  youth  imbibed  spiritual  draughts 


Opinions  on  the  value  of  the  Talmud.  109 

from  the  Talmudic  fountain.  Why  trouble  our  students  with 
that  irksome  and  useless  branch  of  literature  why  not  instead 
of  it  rather  take  up  other  subjects  of  more  modern  thought? 

Let  us,  therefore,  shortly  consider  the  question:  For  what 
purpose  do  we  study  the  Talmud,  or  why  is  that  study  indispen- 
sable for  every  one  who  prepares  for  the  Jewish  ministry  ? 

In  the  first  place,  my  young  friends,  I  wish  to  call  your  at 
tention  to  the  fact  that  the  Talmud  is  a  product  of  the  mental 
labors  of  our  sages  and  teachers  during  a  period  of  eight  hun- 
dred to  one  thousand  years,  and  that  the  pages  of  this  volumin- 
ous literary  work  offer  a  natural  reflection  of  whatever  the 
Jewish  mind  has  thought,  perceived  and  felt  during  that  long 
period  under  the  most  different  circumstances  and  times,  under 
joyful  and  gloomy  events,  under  elevating  and  oppressing  in- 
l^uences, 

I  beg  you  to  consider  furthermore  what  a  powerful  and 
decided  influence  this  gigantic  literary  work  after  its  final  con- 
clusion has  exercised  upon  the  mind  and  the  religious  and  mo- 
ral life  of  the  professors  of  Judaism  during  fourteen  centuries 
up  to  our  time.  Consider,  how  it  is  to  be  ascribed  to  their 
general  occupation  with,  and  veneration  for  the  Talmud  that 
our  ancestors  during  the  dark  centuries  of  the  Middle  Ages  did 
not  become  mentally  hebetated  and  morally  corrupted,  in  spite 
of  the  degradation  and  systematic  demoralization  which  they 
had  been  exposed  to.  For  while  the  study  of  the  more  dialectic 
part  of  that  literature  preserved  their  intellectual  powers  ever 
fresh  and  active  and  developed  some  of  the  greatest  minds,  the 
reading  of  those  popular  sayings  and  impressive  moral  and  re- 
ligious maxims  with  which  the  Talmudic  writings  are  so  amply 
provided,  fostered  even  within  our  masses  that  unshaken  faith- 
fulness and  that  unparalleled  firmness  of  character  by  which 
they  resisted  all  persecutions  and  all  alluring  temptations. 

Take  all  this  into  consideration,  and  you  will  perceive  that 
none  can  expect  to  know  and  understand  Judaism  as  histori- 
cally developed,  without  knowing  the  Talmud,  without  being 
familiar  with  the  spirit  of  that  vast  literature   which  proved 


no  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

such  a  powerful  agency  in  the  development  of  Judaism  and  in 
its  preservation. 

Let  me  also  tell  you,  that  he  is  greatly  mistaken  who  ima 
gines  that  modern  Judaism  can  entirely  discard  and  disregard 
the  Talmud  in  religious  questions.  Although  its  authority  is 
not  any  longer  respected  as  absolutely  binding,  albeit  under^ 
the  changed  circumstances  in  which  we  are  living,  many  laws 
and  customs  treated  and  enjoined  in  the  Talmutl  have  become 
obsolete  and  impracticable,  and  though  many  religious  views  ex- 
pressed by  the  Talmudists  are  rejected  as  incompatible  with 
modern  thoughts  and  conceptions,  it  is  a  fact,  that  Juda- 
ism nowadays  still  rests  on  the  foundation  which  is  laid  down 
in  the  Talmud.  Thus  for  instance,  the  elements  of  our  ritual 
prayers  and  the  arrangement  of  our  public  service,  our  festive 
calendar  and  the  celebration  of  some  of  our  holiest  festivals, 
the  marriage  law  and  innumerable  forms  and  customs  of  the  re- 
ligious life  are,  though  more  or  less  modified  and  fashioned  ac- 
cording to  the  demands  of  our  time,  still  on  the  whole  permeat- 
ed and  governed  by  the  Talmudic  principles  and  regulations. 

You  can  therefore  never  expect  to  have  a  full  and  clear 
insight  into  our  relgious  institutions  without  being  able  to  go 
to  the  source  from  which  they  emanated. 

I  could  also  speak  of  the  great  importance  of  the  Talmud 
in  so  far  as  it  contains  a  vast  fund  of  informations  which  are  of 
decided  value  to  general  history  and  literature  and  to  different 
branches  of  science,  but  I  will  remind  you  only  of  its  great  sig- 
nificance in  regard  to  two  branches  of  knowledge  which  are  of 
vital  import  to  Jewish  theology  and  the  Jewish  ministry.  I 
refer  to  the  interpretation  of  the  Bible  and  to  Ethics. 

The  great  value  of  the  Talmud  for  Bible  exegesis  and  Bible 
criticism  is  generally  acknowledged  even  by  non-Jewish  scholars. 

In  regard  to  its  value  for  Ethics  I  shall  quote  here  a  pas- 
sage from  an  elaborate  and  lucid  article  on  tlie  Talmud  which  the 
venerable  Rabbi  Dr.  Samuel  Adler  in  New  York  published  lately 
in  one  of  the  American  Encyclopedias.     He  says: 

''With  the  consideration  of  the  ethical  significance  of  the 
Talmud  we  approach  the  highest  level,  the  crowning  portion  of 


Opinions  on  the  value  of  the  Talmud.  Ill 

the  whole  work.  Not  but  that  we  meet  with  passages  that 
must  be  rejected  by  a  pure  morality  ;  prevailing  views  and  em- 
bittering experiences  have  certainly  exercised  a  disturbing  in- 
fluence on  the  ethical  views  of  various  spiritual  heroes  of  the 
Talmud;  but  these  are  isolated  phenomena,  and  disappear,  com- 
pared with  the  moral  elevation  and  purity  of  the  overwhelming 
majority  of  the  men  of  the  Talmud,  and  compared  with  the  spirit 
that  animates  the  work  as  a  whole.  What  is  laid  down  as  the 
moral  law  in  the  Talmud  can  still  defy  scrutiny  at  the  present 
day;  and  the  very  numerous  examples  of  high  moral  views  and 
actions  on  the  part  of  the  Talmudists  are  such  as  can  not  be 
found  in  any  work  of  antiquity,  and  must  still  excite  the  admir- 
ation of  the  reader  of  the  present  day,  in  spite  of  the  ceremonial 
fetters  which  they  bore,  and  in  spite  of  the  occasional  narrow- 
ness of  their  point  of  view." 

To  impress  you  the  more  with  the  necessity  of  the  Talmudic 
studies  for  a  clear  conception  of  Judaism  and  its  history,  I  could 
also  quote  the  opinions  of  many  of  our  greatest  scholars,  but 
shall  confine  myself  only  to  a  quotation  from  the  writings  of  two 
of  our  most  renowned  scholars  whom  none  will  suspect  of  hav- 
ing been  biased  by  a  too  great  predilection  for  the  Talmud;  one 
is  the  late  Dr.  Geiger,  and  the  other  our  great  historian,  the 
late  Dr.  Jost. 

Geiger  {Das  Judenthum  und  seine  Geschichte  I.  p.  155)  in 
speaking  of  the  Talmud  and  the  rabbinical  literature,  says: 

^'Gigantic  works,  productions  of  gloomy  and  brighter  per- 
iods are  here  before  us,  monuments  of  thought  and  intellectual 
labor;  they  excite  onr  admiration.  I  do  not  indorse  every 
word  of  the  Talmud,  nor  every  idea  expressed  by  the  teachers 
in  the  time  of  the  Middle  Ages,  but  I  would  not  miss  a  tittle 
thereof.  They  contain  an  acumen  and  power  of  thought  which 
fill  us  with  reverence  for  the  spirit  that  animated  our  ancestors, 
a  fulness  of  sound  sense,  salutary  maxims — a  freshness  of  opinion 
often  bursts  upon  us  that  even  to  this  day  exercises  its  enlive- 
ning and  inspiring  effect." 


112  HiSTOKICAL  AND  LITERARY  INTRODUCTION. 

Jost  in  his  Geschichte  des  Judenthum  s  und  seiner  Secten  IT., 
202,  characterizes  the  Talmud  by  the  following  masterly  words: 

^'The  Talmud  is  a  great  mine,  in  which  are  imbedded  all 
varieties  of  metals  and  ores.  Here  may  be  found  all  kinds  of 
valuables,  the  finest  gold  and  rarest  gems,  as  also  the  merest 
dross.  Much  has  been  unearthed  that  has  realized  countless 
profit  to  the  world.  The  great  spiritual  work  whose  outcome 
has  been  apparent  in  the  advancement  of  religion  has  shown 
that  the  Talmud  is  not  only  of  incalculable  value  in  the  pursuit 
of  wisdom,  but  that  it  has  a  self-evident  significance  for  all  times, 
which  can  not  be  shown  by  any  mere  extracts  from  its  pages, 
and  that  it  can  not  be  disregarded  on  the  plea  of  its  antiquity 
as  valueless  m  the  knowledge  of  the  Jewish  religion.  Indeed 
it  is  and  must  remain  the  chief  source  of  this  knowledge,  and 
particularly  of  the  historical  development  of  the  Jewish  religion. 
More  than  this,  it  is  the  abode  of  that  spirit  which  has  inspired 
that  religion,  these  many  centuries,  that  spirit  from  which  even 
those  who  sought  to  counteract  it  could  not  escape.  It  is  and 
will  remain  a  labyrinth  with  deep  shafts  and  openings,  in  which 
isolated  spirits  toil  with  tireless  activity,  a  labyrinth  which 
offers  rich  rewards  to  those  who  enter  impelled  by  the 
desire  to  gain,  not  without  hidden  dangers  to  those  who  venture 
wantonly  into  its  mazes  and  absorb  its  deadly  vapors.  Re- 
ligion has  created  this  work,  not  indeed  to  give  utterance  in  an 
unsatisfactory  way  to  the  great  questions  of  Deity  and  Nature, 
Mortality  and  Eternity,  and  not  to  carry  on  controversies  upon 
the  proper  formulation  of  articles  of  faith,  but  to  give  expres- 
sion to  a  religion  of  deed,  a  religion  designed  to  accompany 
man  from  the  first  steps  in  his  education  until  he  reaches  the 
grave,  and  beyond  it;  a  guide  by  which  his  desires  and  actions 
are  to  be  regulated  at  every  moment,  by  which  all  his  move- 
ments are  to  be  guarded,  that  takes  care  even  of  his  food  and 
drink,  of  his  pleasures  and  pains,  of  his  mirth  and  sorrow,  and 
seeks  to  elevate  him,  at  all  times,  to  an  enunciation  of  the  pur- 
est faith. 

It  is  thus  tha,t  this  spirit,  which  breathes  from  the  Talmud, 
enters  into  the  nation's  inmost  life.     It  offers  repeated  recitals 


Opinions  on  the  value  of  the  Talmud.  113 

of  the  various  modes  of  thinking,  practising,  believing,  of  the 
true  and  false  representations,  of  hopes  and  longings,  of  know- 
ledge and  error,  of  the  great  lessons  of  fate,  of  undertakings 
and  their  consequences,  of  utterances  and  their  effects,  of  per- 
sons and  their  talents  and  inaptitudes,  of  words  and  examples, 
of  customs,  both  in  matters  of  public  worship  and  private  life; 
in  short,  of  all  the  happenings,  past  or  cotemporary,  in  the 
time  which  the  Talmud  comprises,  /.  <?.,  a  period  of  nearly  one 
thousand  years,  excluding  the  Bible  times. 

Hence,  also,  its  great  value  to  antiquarians  in  the  frequent 
allusions  to  facts,  opinions  and  statements,  to  modes  of  expres- 
sion and  grammatical  construction,  to  peculiarities  of  every 
kind,  which  at  the  same  time  afford  a  view  of  the  development 
of  mankind,  such  as  no  other  work  of  the  past  gives. 

To  treat  the  Talmud  with  scorn  because  of  its  oddues,  on 
account  of  much  that  it  contains  that  does  not  conform  to  our 
maturer  modes  of  thinking,  because  of  its  evident  errors  and 

misconceptions — errors  from  ignorance  or  errors  in   copying, . 

to  throw  it  overboard,  as  it  were,  as  useless  ballast,  would  be 
to  insult  all  history,  to  deprive  it  of  one  of  its  strongest  limbs,  to 
dismember  it. 

To  dam  up  its  channels  by  taking  away  the  Talmud,  would 
be  to  close  the  access  to  the  head  waters  and  living  sources  of 
the  Jewish  religion,  and  thus  leave  her  again  in  a  desert  land, 
after  the  tables  of  the  law  have  already  called  forth  a  world  of 
life  and  activity.  It  would  be  turning  one's  back,  as  it  were, 
denying  and  disregarding  one's  own.  There  is  a  historical  jus- 
tification for  the  sharply  defined  modes  of  worship  and  religious 
forms  that  have  their  embodiment  in  set  words  and  in  fixed 
deeds.  For  this  we  must  look  to  the  Talmud.  Judaism  is 
rooted  in  the  Talmud  and  would  be  tossed  about  in  mid-air  if 
torn  from  its  soil, or  require  a  new  planting  and  a  new  growth." 
In  conclusion,  my  young  friends,  let  me  say  this: 
If  our  College  had  no  other  purpose  than  to  graduate  com- 
mon Sabbath  school  teachers  who  should  be  able  to  occasional- 
ly deliver  popular  though  superficial  lectures,  the  study  of  the 


114  Historical  and  Literary  Introduction. 

Talmud  as  well  as  that  of  our  rabbinical  and  philosophical  litera- 
ture, might  have  been  stricken  from  the  course  of  your  studies. 
But  our  College  has  a  higher  aim  and  object.  Its  object  is  to 
educate  future  guides  and  leaders  of  our  congregations,  to  edu- 
cate banner-bearers  of  Judaism,  representatives  and  cultivators 
of  Jewish  knowledge  and  literature. 

You  can  never  expect  to   answer  this  purpose  without  a 
thorough  knowledg3  of,  and  familiarity  with,  that  vast  literature 
that  offers  us  the  means  to  follow  and  understand  the  religious 
formation,    the  growth  and  the  entire  course  of  development  of 
Judaism  from  its  beginning  to  the  present  time." 


PART    II, 


LEGAL    HERMENEUTICS    OF    THE    TALMUD 


LEGAL  HERMENEUTICS  OF  THE  TALMUD, 

INTRODUCTION. 
a.    Definition. 

§  1. 

Hermeneuticg  is  the  science  of  interpretation  or  of  expltun- 
ing  the  meaning  of  an  author's  words,  according  to  certain 
rules.  The  term  is  especially  applied  to  the  exegesis  or  inter- 
pretation of  the  sacred  Scripture. 

Although  hermeneutics  and  exegesis  are  synonyms,  as  both 
words  from  which  they  are  derived  Bpfirjveveiv  and  ^^7r«^^^«« 
mean  to  explain^  interpret^  still  literary  usage  makes  that  differ- 
ence between  them,  that  the  term  hermeneutics  refers  to  that 
branch  of  science  which  establishes  the  principles  and  rules  of 
interpretation,  while  exegesis  is  the  actual  application  of  those 
principles  and  rules. 

By  Legal  Hermeneutics  of  the  Talmud  we  understand 
an  exposition  of  those  principles  and  rules  which  the  teachers 
of  the  Talmud  established  in  their  interpretation  of  the  Biblic- 
al Law. 

b.    Methods  of  Interpretation. 
§  2. 

The  Ta'mud  distinguishes  between  two  methods  of  Script- 
ural interpretation,  one  which  is  termed  Feshat^  and  the 
other  Derash. 

Peshat  (lotJ^B)  is  the  plain  interpretation,  where  a  law  or  a 
passage  in  Scripture  is  explained  in  the  most  natural  way  ac- 
cording to  the  letter,  the  grammatical  construction,  and 
the  spirit  of  the  passage.  Hence  the  talmudic  phrase:  rT'tDtTS 
SnpT  the  plain  msaning,  the  immediate  and  primary  sense  of  a 
Scriptural  passage  (Chullin  6a). 


118  Hermeneutics  of  the  Talmud. 

Derash  (from  ti^li  to  search,  investigate)  is  that  method 
by  which  it  is  intended,  for  certain  reasons,  to  interpret  a 
passage  in  a  more  artificial  way  which  often  deviates  from  the 
plain  and  natural  meaning.  The  result  of  this  method  of  inter- 
pretation is  termed  ti^mD  that  which  is  searched  out,  the  artifi- 
cial deduction,  as  'S  ti^"n  DITD  HT  this  artificial  interpretation 
was  made  by  that  certain  teacher,    Mishna  Shekalim  YI,  6. 

As  an  illustration  of  these  two  methods  of  interpretation 
we  refer  to  the  following  passage  in  Deut.  XXIY,  16.  inDT'  '^ 

'^The  fathers  shall  not  be  put  to  death  for  the  children, 
neither  shall  the  children  be  put  to  death  for  the  fathers."  The 
plain  and  natural  meaning  of  this  passage  is  that  the  family  of  a 
criminal  shall  not  be  involved  in  his  punishment.  But  the  arti- 
ficial interpretation  of  the  Rabbis  which  is  also  adopted  in  the 
Targum  Onkelos  takes  the  word  h]^  in  the  sense  of  nn^i 
through  the  testimo7iy^  and  explains  this  passage  to  the  efi'ect 
that  the  testimony  of  relatives  must  never  be  accepted  in  a  crim- 
inal or  civil  case.     Talm.  Sanhedrin  fol.  2Yb. 

C.      Two  KINDS  OF  MlDRASH. 

§  3. 

There  are  two  kinds  of  Midrash.  Where  the  interpreta- 
tion bears  on  the  enactment  or  determination  of  a  law,  be  it 
a  ritual,  ceremonial,  ci^^il,  or  criminal  law,  it  is  called  ti^^lD 
TdlT\  Interpretation  of  Halacha^  or  legal  interpretation. 

But  where  the  Midrash  does  not  concern  legal  enactments 
and  provisions,  but  merely  inquires  into  the  meaning  and  signi- 
ficance of  the  laws  or  where  it  only  uses  the  words  of  Scripture 
as  a  vehicle  to  convey  a  moral  teaching  or  a  religious  instruc- 
tion and  consolation,  it  is  called  T\"^y^  ^•'."ID  Interpretation  of 
the  Agada,  homiletical  interpretation. 

The  following  examples  will  illustrate  both  kinds  of  Midrash. 

1)  In  Lev.  XIX,  3  the  law  reads:  isnTl  ViSl  1D«  C^'^S 
*'Ye  shall  fear  every  man  his  mother,  and  his  father".  In  the 
interpretation  of  this  passage   the  Rabbis  explain  that  the  ex- 


Introduction.  119 

pression  ti^^s  every  man  must  here  not  be  taken  in  its  literal 
sense,  as  if  referring  to  the  man  (the  son)  only,  and  not  also  to 
woman  (the  daughter),  for  the  plural  form  "ye  shall  fear"  in- 
cludes the  daughter  as  well  as  the  son  in  this  divine  injunction 
of  filial  respect  and  obedience: 

?  pD  ntt^«  ^^^  «^«  "h  ]••«  t£>''« 

Talm.  Kiddushin  30b. 

This  is  Midrash  Halacha,  as  it  concerns  the  determination 
of  the  law. 

Commenting  on  the  same  passage,  the  Rabbis  further  ex- 
plain why  in  this  passage  the  first  place  is  given  to  the  mother, 
while  in  the  decalogue  where  filial  love  to  parents  is  command- 
ed, the  father  is  mentioned  first.  The  reason  offered  is, 
that  as  a  rule  children  fear  the  father,  but  love  the  mother  more 
particularly.  (Ibid.  fol.  31a.)  This  explanation  belongs  rather 
to  the  Agada. 

2)  In  Exodus  XX,  25  the  law  reads  :  <'And  if  thou  vsdlt 
make  me  an  altar  of  stone,  thou  shalt  not  build  it  (jnns)  of 
hewn  stone:  for  if  thou  lift  up  thy  iron  tool  upon  it,  thou  hast 
polluted  it." 

The  Midrash  Halacha  of  this  passage  emphasizes  the  ob- 
jective pronoun  jnns  and  concludes  that  the  prohibition  of 
hewn  stones  is  restricted  to  the  altar  only,  but  in  building  the 
temple  such  stones  may  be  used: 

^:DMa  nn;i  tm^i  nn«  ^3«  nnj  niin  nn«  •'^^  u 

Mechilta,  Yithro  XI. 

The  Midrash  Agada  to  this  passage  explains  ingeniously 
the  reason  why  the  application  of  iron  is  here  called  a  pollution 
of  the  altar;  it  is  because  iron  abridges  life,  the  altar  prolongs 
it;  iron  causes  destruction  and  misery,  the  altar  produces  re- 
conciliation between  God  and  man ;  and  therefore  the  use  of 
iron  cannot  be  allowed  in  making  the  altar.  (Mechilta  ibid.  ; 
compare  also  Mishna  Middoth  III,  4.) 


120  Hermeneutics  of  the  Talmud. 

The  hermeneutic  rules  for  Midrash  Agada  resemble  in 
many  respects  those  of  Midrash  Halacha,  in  others  they  differ. 
We  propose  to  treat  here  especially  of  the  Hermeneutics  of 
the  Halacha. 

ORIGIlSr  AND  DEVELOPMENT  OF  MIDRASH  HALACHA. 

a.      ClBOUMSTANOES  THAT  NECESSITATED  ARTIFICIAL 
INTERPRETATION. 


Ever  since  the  time  of  Ezra,  the  Scribe,  and  especially 
since  the  religious  and  political  revival  under  the  Maccabees, 
the  law  embodied  in  the  Pentateuch  was  generally  looked  upon 
as  the  rule  of  Israel's  life.  But  side  by  side  with  this  wriiien 
law,  anD^tfi^  nnn,  went  an  unwritten,  oral  law  nS  ^j;2tJ^  nmn. 

This  consisted  partly  of  a  vast  store  of  religious  and  na- 
tional customs  and  usages  which  had  been  established  in  the 
course  of  several  centuries  and  handed  down  orally  from  gen- 
eration to  generation;  partly  of  decrees  and  ordinances  enacted 
according  to  exigencies  of  the  changed  times  and  cir- 
cumstances by  the  Sopherim  and  the  succeeding  authorities, 
the  Sanhedrin. 

As  long  as  the  validity  of  this  oral  law  had  not  been 
questioned,  there  was  no  need  of  founding  it  on  a  Scriptural 
basirt.  It  stood  on  its  own  footing,  and  was  shielded  by  the 
authority  of  tradition.  From  the  time  hovever  when  the 
Sadducean  ideas  began  to  spread,  which  tended  to  undermine 
the  authority  of  the  traditional  law  and  reject  everything  not 
founded  on  the  Scriptures,  the  effort  was  made  by  the  teachers 
to  place  the  traditions  under  the  shield  of  the  word  of  the 
Thora.  To  accomplish  this  task,  the  plain  and  natural  inter- 
pretation did  not  always  suffice.  More  artificial  methods  had 
to  be  devised  by  which  the  sphere  of  the  written  law  could  be 
extended  so  as  to  offer  a  basis  and  support  for  every  traditional 
law  and  observance,  and,  at  the  same  time,  to  enrich  the  sub- 
stance of  this  law  with  new  provisions  for  cases  not  yet  provi- 


Introduction.  121 

ded  for.  Tliis  artificial  interpretation  which  originated  in  the 
nrgent  desire  to  ingraft  the  traditions  on  the  stem  of  Scripture 
or  harmonize  the  oral  with  the  written  law,  could,  of  course,  in 
many  instances  not  be  effected  without  strained  constructions 
£«id  the  exercise  of  some  violence  on  the  biblical  text,^  as  is  illus- 
trated in  the  following  example. 

It  was  a  rule  of  law  established  by  tradition,  firstly,  that 
judicial  decisions  are  rendered  by  a  majority  of  votes;  secondly 
that  in  capital  cases,  the  majority  of  one  vote  was  sufficient  for 
the  acquittal,  but  for  the  condemnation  a  majority  of  at  least 
two  votes  was  required;  thirdly  that  in  taking  the  votes  in  a 
criminal  case,  it  must  be  commenced  from  the  youngest  judge, 
in  order  that  his  opinion  and  vote  shall  not  be  influenced  by 
that  of  his  older  colleagues. 

When  the  question  came  up  to  find  a  biblical  basis  for 
these  rules,  reference  was  made  to  the  following  passage  in  Ex. 
XXIII,  2  which  reads: 

nv;-i^  n''3n  -ins  n''nn  «^ 

^'Thou  Shalt  not  follow  the  many  to  evil,  neither  shaltthou 
speak  in  a  case  to  deviate  after  the  many  to  pervert  justice". 

In  its  simple  sense  this  passage  is  a  warning  for  the  judge 
as  well  as  for  the  witness  not  to  be  influenced  by   the  unjust 


'  'i'his  effort  to  base  traditional  institutions  and  usages  on  the 
A\  ritten  law  is  not  without  a  certain  parallel-though  under  quite  differ- 
ent circumstances  and  influences— in  the  history  of  jurisprudence 
among  other  nations,  as  may  be  seen  from  the  following  interesting 
notice  in  Lieber's  "Legal  and  Political  Hermeneutics,"  page  239.  Speak- 
ing of  the  law  which  grew  up  in  the  course  of  centuries  by  the  combina- 
tion of  the  lex  scripta,  or  Roman  law,  with  the  customs  of  the  various 
nations  that  received  it,  he  says:  "A  favorite  field  for  the  exercise  of 
professional  ingenuity  was  the  interpretation  of  the  Roman  law  in  such 
manner  as  to  find  therein  formal  written  authority  for  the  inetitatiooe, 
rules  and  usages  that  the  Germanic  races  had  inherited  from  their 
ancestors.  For  a  centuiy  past  it  has  been  one  of  the  chief  taaks  of  the 
continental  jurists,  and  especially  of  the  class  among  them  known  as 
Germanists,  to  restore  these  remains  of  national  law  to  their  original 
shripe,  free  from  the  distortions  and  disguises  forced  upon,  them  by 
this  Romanizing  process." 


122  Hermeneutics  of  the  Talmud. 

opinioTi  ci  the  multitude  in  a  law  suit,  but  to  follow  his  own 
conviction  in  giving  his  vote  or  his  testimony.  But  the  arti- 
ficial interpretation  forced  upon  this  passage  a  different  mean- 
ing. By  separating  the  last  three  words  m:Dn^  ^2^  "'"inS  from 
the  context  and  forming  them  as  a  separate  sentence  :the  Rabbis 
found  therein  an  express  biblical  precept  ''to  lean  to  the  major- 
ity", that  is,  to  decide  doubtful  cases  by  a  majority  of  votes. 
The  first  part  of  the  passage  ''thou  shalt  not  follow  the  many 
to  evil"  was  interpreted  to  mean  "do  not  follow  the  simple  maj- 
ority (of  one)  for  co7idemnation^  as  for  the  acquittal,  but  it  re- 
quires at  least  a  majority  of  two  votes  to  condemn  the  accused 
(Mishna  Sanhedrin  I,  6) 

The  word  ^''^  in  the  middle  part  of  the  passage,  being 
here  exceptiou ally  written  in  the  text  without  a  mater  lectionis 
2^/  so  as  to  admit  the  word  to  be  read  Rabh  (the  superior),  one 
of  the  Babylonian  teachers  made  use  of  this  circumstance  to  in- 
terpret an  ^J?  niyn  S^  "thou  shalt  not  express  thy  opinion  af- 
ter the  superior",  hence  the  younger  members  of  a  criminal 
court  have  to  vote  first  (Talm.   Sanhedrin  36a). 

Conclusions  derived  by  authoritative  interpretations  from 
the  Mosaic  Law  were,  in  general,  endowed  with  the  same  au- 
thority and  sanctity  as  the  clear  utterances  of  that  Law,  and 
termed  niinn  JD  or,  in  the  Aramaic  form,  s*n*'"»"n8Tt:  (derived 
from  the  Biblical  law). 

In  many  instances,  however,  the  Talmudic  teachers  freely 
admit  that  the  meaning  which  they  put  upon  the  text  was  not 
the  plain  and  natural  interpretation;  that  "the  natural  sense 
of  a  passage  must  never  be  lost  sight  of"',  and  that  their  strain- 


'  Maimonides  ('3  CHIET  miVtDn  'D)  holds  that  laws  derived  from 
the  Mosaic  law  by  means  of  the  heTmeneutic  rules  are,  in  general,  not 
to  be  regarded  as  hihlical  laws  (,-ninn  p)  except  when  expressly  char- 
acterized as  such  in  the  Talmud.  But  this  somewhat  rational  view 
is  strongly  criticized  by  Nachmanides  (in  his  annotations  to  that  book) 
who  shows  that  from  the  Talmudical  standpoint  every  law  which 
the  Rabbis  derived  by  the  authoritative  interpretation  from  sacred 
Scripture,  has  the  character  and  sanctity  of  a  Mosaic  Law. 

'  ItDlfij'B  ntD  «VV  K"lpr:n  }"•«    Sabbath  63a;  Yebamoth  lib;  34a. 


Introduction. 


123 


ed  interpretation  must  be  regarded  merely  as  an  attempt  *'to 
provide  an  establislied  custom  and  law  with  a  Biblical  sup- 
port".' 

Remark.  There  are  some  legal  traditions  of  an  ancient  date  most- 
ly concerning  the  ritual  law,  for  which  the  Rabbis  were  unable  to  find 
a  biblical  support  or  even  a  mere  hint.  They  are  termed  T\mb  nDt^H 
^rDD  "traditional  laws  handed  down  from  Moses  on  Sinai".  That  this 
phrase  is  not  to  be  taken  liter^ly,but  often  as  merely  intended  to  desig- 
nate a  very  old  tradition  the  origin  of  which  cannot  be  traced,  is  evid- 
ent from  Mishna  Eduyoth  VIII,  7.  Maimonides  in  the  introduction  to 
his  Mishna  Commentary  enumerates  the  teaditions  mentioned  in  the 
Talmud  by  that  appellation  to  the  number  of  twenty  three.  This  enu- 
meration, however  has  been  found  not  to  be  quite  correct,  as  the  tradi- 
tions designated  by  that  name  actually  amount  to  the  number  of  fifty 
five.    Compare  Herzfeld,  Geschichte  des  Volkes  Israel  II,  227-233. 

b.     The  earliest  collection  of  Hekmeneutic  Rules. 

§5. 

Hillel  the  Elder,  who  flourished  abount  a  century  before 
the  destruction  of  the  second  temple,  is  mentioned  as  having 
been  the  first  to  lay  down  certain  hermeneutic  rules  (nHD), 
seven  in  number,  for  the  purpose  of  expounding  the  written 
law  and  extending  its  provisions.  Some  of  these  rules  were 
probably  already  known  before  Hillel,  though  not  generally 
applied:  but  it  was  his  merit  to  have  fixed  them  as  standard 
rules  of  legal  interpretation.  The  headings  of  his  seven  rules 
are  : 

1.     nDim  b^,  the  inference  from  minor  and  major. 

2      mtt'  m'^Tl  the  analogy  of  expressions. 

3.  -ins  ^in^D  2S  ]^^2,  the   generalization  of  one  special 
provision.  .  , 

4.  D^ainD  ^r^*D  2S  |''::i.  the  generalization  of  two  special 

provisions. 

9a     Compare   also    the  phrase:    ND^yn   NH^r^CX    ^np  Berachoth  41b, 
Yoma  80b;  B.  Met2da  88b  and  elsewhere  very  often  used. 


124  Hep.mknetjtics  of  the  Talmud. 

6.     tD*l51  ^^D/  the  effect  of  general  and  particular  terms. 

6.  ini<  Dlput^  ^Z  ^^^')''2,  the  aaaiugy  inad^  from  another 
passage. 

'^.  M^2]^'t^  l^bn  121,  the  explanation  derived  from  the 
context. 

These  seven  rules  of  Hillel  having  later  been  embodied  in 
the  system  of  R.  Tshmael,  their  fuller  contents  and  application 
will  be  explained  in  the  exposition  of  the  single  rules  of  that  sys- 
tem.^ 

C.      A  NEW  METHOD  OF  INTERPRETATION  INTRODUCED 
BY  NaHUM. 

§6. 

Besides  the  seven  rules  of  Hillel  which  were  generally 
adopted,  some  other  peculiar  methods  of  interpreting  the  Scrip- 
ture were  introduced  by  succeeding  teachers  for  the  sake  of 
making  new  deductions  from  the  written  law.  Thus  Nahtim  of 
Ghnzo^  a  contemporary  of  R.  Johanan  ben  Zaccai,  originated  a 
method  which  is  termed  tD1^''aT  ''Un  the  extension  and  lunitation. 
According  to  this  method  certain  particles  and  conjunctions 
employed  in  the  Mosaic  law  were  intended  to  indicate  the  ex- 
tension or  limitation  of  its  provisions,  so  as  to  include  the  ad- 
ditions of  tradition,  or  exclude  what  tradition  excludes.  As 
extensions  were  regarded  especially  the  words:  DS  ,n«  .DJ  and 
^D,  and  as  limitations  the  words:  "]j<,  ]D  and  pn. 

This  method  is  illustrated  by  the  following  examples: 

1)  The  word  n^  which  marks  the  direct  objective  case 
agrees  in  form  with  the  preposition  ns  with.  Hence  this  word 
in  the  passage  Deut.  X,  20:  ^tn'in  "]M^S  ••"•>  nj<  is  interpreted 
□••DDn  '''T'D^n  mrn^  ''it  is  to  include  the  wise  men",  who  are 
to  bo  revered  along  with  God  (Pesachim  22b.). 

2)  The  principle  that  ^'acts  done  through  our  agent  are 
as  if  done  by  ourselves",  is  derived  from  the  passage  Numbers 
XVIII,    28:    nns*  Di  1D''nn  p    ''Thus  ye    also   shall  offer   an 

»  These  seven  rules  of  Hillel  are  quoted  m  Tosephta  Sanhedrin  ch. 
VII;  ALoth  of  R.  Nathan  ch.  XXXVII  and  in  the  introductory  chapter 
of  the  Siphra. 


Introduction  125 

heave  offering",  by  interpreting :  n^'^trn  ns  r\^y)b  D3  ''this 
a/so  is  to  include  your  agen^;  he  may  offer  your  heave  offering  in 
your  place".  Kiddushin  41b. 

3)  That  the  rigorous  precepts  of  the  Sabbath  do  not 
apply  to  cases  where  life  is  in  danger  (ffi'S:  mp''£)),  is  derived 
from  the  limiting  word  "(«  in  the  passage  Exod.  XXXI,  13: 
iniDtyn  Tiin^tr  n«  "]S  :  ^'merely  my  Sabbaths  you  shall  keep" 
by  interpreting  p^n^  ^«,  this  ''merely"  excludes  such  cases. 
Yoma  85b. 

d.    Development  op  this  method  by  R.  Akiba.- 

§  t. 

This  new  method  of  R.  Nahum  of  Gimzo  was  not  general 
ly  approved  by  his  contemporaries.  One  of  its  opponents  was 
R.  Nehunia  ben  Hakana  who  insisted  upon  retaining  only  the 
rules  of  Hillel.^  But  in  the  following  generation,  the  celebrat- 
ed R.  Akiba  resumed  the  method  of  his  former  teacher  Nahum 
of  Gimzo,  and  developed  it  into  a  system.  The  underlying 
principle  of  that  system  was  that  the  language  of  the  Thora 
differs  from  human  language.  The  latter  often  uses  more 
words,  to  express  ideas,  than  necessary;  superflous  words  being 
inserted  either  for  the  sake  of  grammatical  form  or  for  the  sake 
of  rhetorical  flourish  and  emphasis.  Not  so  the  language  in 
which  the  divine  law  was  framed.  Here  not  a  word,  not  a 
syllable  and  not  even  a  letter  is  superfluous,  but  all  is  essential 
and  of  vital  importance  to  define  the  intention  of  a  law  and  to 
hint  at  deductions  to  be  made  therefrom.  According  to  this 
principle  the  indication  of  an  extension  and  limitation  of  the 
law  is  not  confined  to  those  few  particles  pointed  out  by 
Nahum  of  Gimzo,  but  every  word  or  part  thereof  which  is  not 
absolutely  indispensable  to  express  the  sense  of  the  law  is  de- 
signed to  enlarge  or  restrict  the  sphere  of  its  provisions. 

Thus  R.  Akiba  and  the  followers  of  his   system  found  indi- 
cations for  the  intended  extension  of  a  law  in  the  repetition  of 

1  See  Talm.  Shebuoth  26a. 


126  Hermbnbutics  of  the  Talmud, 

a  word »;  in  the  absolute  infinitive  joined  with  the  finite  foriM 
of  a  vero;"^  in  the  conjunction  is  '  and  in  the  conjunctive  *)  .  In- 
dications for  an  intended  limitation  o€  the  law  are  foiHwi  by 
laying  stress  either  on  a  demonstrative  pronoun, »  or  on  the 
definite  article  n ',  or  on  the  personal  pronoun  added  to  a 
verb ',  or  on  a  pronominal  suffix  ^  or  <m  saiy  noun '  or  verb** 
occurring  in  that  law. 

The  new  hermeneutic  rules  which  R.  Akiba  thus  added  to 
those  of  Hillel  and  Nahum  oflfered  entirely  new  ways  and  means 
to  find  a  Scriptural  basis  for  the  oral  laws,  and  to  enrich  its 
Rubstance  with  many  valuable  deductions. 

e.    K.  Ishmael's  Rules. 
§8. 

The  ingenious  system  of  R.  Akiba,  though  received  with  ad- 
miration by  many  of  his  contemporaries,  had  also  its  opponents. 
One  of  the  most  prominent  among  these  was  R.  Ishmael  b. 
Elisha.  He  claimed  :  ms  ^ja  ]Wh^  nmn  mm  ^'The  divine 
Law  speaks  in  the  ordinary  language  of  Men".  Therefore,  no 
special  weight  ought  to  be  attached  to  its  turns  of  speech  and 
repetitions  so  customary  in  human  language.  He  consequently 
rejected  most  of  the  deductions  which  K  Akiba  based  on  a 
seemingly  pleonastic   word,    superfluous  syllable  or  letter,   and 

»  f.  i.  Pesachim  36a:  ni^^  niVO  niVD  ;  Yebamoth  70a  :  ^^N  B>^K 
i)"iyn  nUl^J  compare  also  Shebuoth  4b:  D^J/il  uhv^) . 

'  Sanhedrin  64b  man  ni3n  ;  B.   Metzia  31  a.  b.   D3^Kn  ^JJ^TJ/    vf?^ 

nWm,  3wn  nrr  etc. 

3  Sanhedrin  34b:  nim!?  nnt  1«;  B.  KAmma  53b:  D'-^an  ns<  TTiTyh  M^ 

*  Sanhediin  51b:  nuib  nni  n3  ;  Yebamoth  68b  ;  pii  tmiT  y""i; 
compare  also    Kefeuboth  103a  :    ^Hin  "I^HK   nx  mai^  m^n''  VV 

»  Horioth   9a:  mnX  pxi  IT    pip  HT ;   Ch»lin  43a:  n^n  /H^nn    HNT 

i6  nirtt<. 

•  Pesachim  5a:  (tDIV'O^)  Ki"^  'h  Hd!?  pC'Xin  fflt^l  &<-|p  2^n^i. 

''  Maccoth  3b:  pDD^?  vh\  5<1»T  iO\y^  XtH  ;  compare  also  Horiofe  lUkiX 

«  Kiddushin  17b:  pH  nx  ^  tM>  n^XD;  S^mhedrin  46a  inW  n^i>ni 

nnife?  ^h's 

»  Kiddushin  18a:  lS^Q33  8<^1  inTJ33;Sanhedrm  52a:  ^tDp!)  tD^Q  K^^K. 
»•  Gittin  20a:  ppn  «i>l  3rD1 ;  Kiddusliin  64a  ;  njsny  0''i)i>n  ^P^JH^  K^l 

O^-UDD  p«1. 


Introduction.  12  Y 

admitted  only  such  deductions  which  could  be  justified  by  the 
spirit  of  the  passage  of  law  under  consideration.  As  standard 
rules  for  interpretation  he  recognized  only  those  laid  down  by 
Hillel  which  he  however  enlarged  to  thirteen  by  subdividing 
some  of  them,  omitting  one,  and  adding  a  new  one  of  his  own. 
The  thirteen  rules  of  R.  Ishmael  are: 

1.  n»im  bp        identical  with  Hillel' s  Rule  I. 

2.  n)^  nV;}       identical  with  Hillel's  Rule  II. 

3.  3X  pia  contraction  of  Hillel's  Rules  III  and  lY. 

4  iDnsi  hb:i    - 

5  bhy\  tD13    ■    subdivision  of  Hillel's  Rule  Y. 

T.  8.  9.  10  and  11  are  modifications  of  Hillel's  Rule  Y. 

12  ISJIDD  TD^n  ■l3^^  *irJ';D  TdS-I  n^l  with  some  addition 
identical  with  Hillel's  Rule  YII. 

13  nr  n«  nr  D'^t^'^nDDn  U^1\T0  ^Wy  this  rule  is  not  at  all 
found  among  Hillel's. 

Among  those  rules  of  R.  Ishmael,  the  sixth  rule  of  Hillel 
<^the  analogy  made  from  another  passage"  is  omitted,  but  this 
omission  is  seeming  only,  since  that  rule  was,  under  differnt 
names:  t^p'^n  (the  analogy)  and  IJ'^^'D  HD  (as  we  find-analogy) 
included  partly  in  the  rule  of  rnt^  riTTl  partly  in  thatof  3^  j«»J2, 
as  will  be  seen  further  on  in  the  fuller  exposition  of  these  two 
rules. 

R.  Ishmael's  thirteen  rules  were  generally  adopted  as  the 
authoritative  rules  of  rabbinical  interpretation  without  however 
supplanting  the  methods  of  R.  Akiba  which  continued  to  be 
favored  by  many  sf  the  Rabbis  and  were  applied  even  by  some 
of  the  immediate  disciples  of  R.  Ishmael.' 

Remark.  R.  Eliezer,  son  of  R.  Jose  the  Galilean,  again  enlarged 
the  hermeneutic  rules  to  the  number  of  thirty  two.  But  as  his  rules 
mostly  refer  to  the  Lomiletical  interpretation,  they  do  not  strictly  be- 
long to  our  subject.  Tlie  Talmud  though  incidentally  praising  the  emi- 
nence of  this  teacher  (Chulin  89),  nowhere  mentions  his  rules.     But  in 


»  Compare  B.  Kamma  84a:  ^^T[  K-l^n"*  Kip  ^yOB'^  'T  ^Tl  \  also  Bad- 
dushin  43:  nUli)  IS  Wn  ^NVDEJ'^  'T  Un. 


128  Hermeneutics  of  the  Talmud. 

theAgadic  interpretation  of  the  Amoraim,some  of  his  rules  are  applied. 
A  Baraitha  of  R.  Eliezer  containing  his  thirty  two  rules  is  not  men- 
tioned in  the  Rabbinical  writings  before  the  tenth  century.  This  Ba- 
raitha is  embodied  in  the  books:  Sefer  Kerithoth  and  Halichoth  Olam 
of  which  we  shall  speak  in  the  following  paragraph. 

Literature  on  the  Hermeneutic  Rules. 
§9. 

The  thirteen  rules  of  R.  Ishmael  are  collected  in  the  intro- 
ductory chapter  of  the  Siphra. 

7?.  Abraham  b.  David  of  Posquieres  (T^Sn)/  in  the  XII  cen- 
tury, wrote  some  valuable  annotations  on  that  chapter  in  his 
commentary  on  the  Siphra. 

R,  Solomon  b.  Isaac  ("'"ti^n),  the  celebrated  commentator  of 
the  Talmud,  in  the  XI  century,  occasionally  explained,  in  his 
lucid  way,  the  single  rules  where  they  are  applied  in  the  Talmu- 
dical  discussions.' 

Of  standard  works  treating  of  the  hermeneutic  rules  we 
mention: 

mn'^'lD  'D  by  R*  Samson  of  Chinon^  in  the  XIY  century. 

D^iy  mD"^^n  'D  by  R.  Jeshua  b.  Joseph  Halevi^  flourishing 
in  the  XY  century,  in  Spain. 

An  abstract  of  the  two  last  mentioned  works  is  found  in 
an  appendix  to  mDnil  HDDD  in  the  usual  Talmud  editions. 

inns  miD  'D  by  Aaron  b.  Chayim^  XYI  century.  This  very 
valuable  treatise  forms  the  first  part  of  the  author's  greater 
work  called  ]nn^  \T\^  which  is  a  commentary  on  the  Siphra. 

nyil^tt^  "^Z^  'D  by  R,  Solomon  b,  Abraham  Algazi^  XVII  cen- 
tury. 


»  A  separate  treatise  on  the  hermeneutic  rules,  ascribed  to  this 
commentator  and  published  in  Kobak's  **Ginze  Nistaroth"  1  11  under 
the  title  of  nnion  ^y  ^K^I  e^n^Q  seems  to  be  spurious.  It  is,  at  most,  a 
compilation  of  his  various  incidental  remarks  on  the  single  rules  found 
in  his  conmientary  on  the  Talmud. 


Introduction.  129 

nODH  n^nn  'D,  by  Jacob  Chagiz  XYII,  century. 

Of  modern  v^orks  on  our  subject  the  following  deserve  to 
be  mentioned: 

Halachische  Exegese  by  H.  S.  Hirschfeld^  Berlin,  1840. 

m"»3~^n  hy  Mordechai  Flongian^  Wilna,  1849.  This  Heb- 
rew book  treats  exclusively  of  the  rule  of  Gezera  Shava. 

Palaestinische  und  alexandi*inische  Schriftforsctung  by  Z, 
Frankcl^  Breslau,  1864, 


EXPOSITION  OF  R.  ISHMAEL'S  HERMENEUTIC  RULES. 

CHAPTER  I. 
THE  INFERENCE  OF  KAL  YE-CHOMER. 

The  rule  which  occupies  the  first  place  in  the  hermeneutic 
system  of  Hillel  as  well  as  in  that  of  R.  Ishmael,  is  termed 
nDim  ^D-  This  rule  is  very  frequently  used  in  the  Talmudic 
discussions.  It  has  quite  a  logical  foundation,  being  a  kind 
of  syllogism,  an  inference  a  fortiori. 

I.  Definition. 

§10. 

In  the  Talmudic  terminology  the  word  ^p  (light  in  weight) 
means  that  which,  from  a  legal  point  of  view,  is  regarded  as 
being  less  important,  less  significant,  and  iDin  (heaviness)  that 
which  is  comparatively  of  great  weight  and  importance.  By 
the  term-iDim  ^D  then  is  meant  an  inference  from  the  less  to  the 
more  important,  and  vice  versa,  from  the  more  to  the  less  im- 
portant. 

For  the  sake  of  convenience,  we  shall  use  the  word  7?iinor 
instead  of  ^p,  and  7?iajor  instead  of  ^,Din  ;  but  we  must  caution 
against  confounding  the  meaning  of  these  words  with  that  of 
the  terms  major  and  minor,  commonly  used  in  logic  in  regard 
to  syllogisms. 

II.  Principle. 

§  11. 

The  principle  underlying  the  inference  of  "iDim  ^p  is,  that 
the  law  is  assumed  to  have  the  tendency  to  proportionate  its 
effect  to  the  importance  of  the  cases  referred  to,  so  as  to  be  more 
rigorous  and  restrictive  in  important,  and  more  lenient  and 
permissive  in  comparatively  unimportant  matters.  Hence,  if  a 
certain  rigorous  restriction  of  the  law  is  found  regarding  a  mat- 
ter of  minor  importance,  we  may  infer  that  the  same  restriction 
is  the  more  applicable  to  that  which  is  of  major  importance, 


The  Inference  from  Minor  and  Major.  131 

though  that  restriction  be  not  expressly  made  in  the  law  for  this 
case.  And  on  the  other  hand,  if  a  certain  allowance  is 
made  by  the  law  regarding  a  thing  of  major  importance,  we  may 
properly  conclude  that  the  same  allowance  is  the  more  applicable 
to  that  which  is  of  comparatively  minor  importancei. 

Thus,  for  instance,  r\2\^  is  in  some  respects  regarded  as 
being  of  more  importance  (niDn)  than  tD"i^  (a  common  holiday). 
If,  therefore,  a  certain  kind  of  work  is  permitted  on  nz\^,  we 
justly  infer  that  such  a  work  is  the  more  permissible  on  tD"T' ; 
and  vice  versa,  if  a  certain  work  is  forbidden  on  ^")^  it  must  all 
the  more  imperatively  be  forbidden  onnnt^.  Mishna  Betza  Y.  2: 

III.  Biblical  Prototype. 

§  12. 

The  inference,  drawn  in  Scripture  (Numbers  xii.  14)  on  a 
certain  occasion  is  regarded  as  a  prototype  of  this  manner  of 
drawing  inaKierences  which  is  emploj^cd  in  theTalmudic  Halacha. 
Miriam  had  been  punished  with  leprosy  as  a  sign  of  the  Lord's 
disfavor,  and  when  the  question  arose  how  long  she  ought  to  be 
shut  out  of  the  camp  in  consequence  of  that  disfavor,  the 
answer  was  ;  ^^If  her  father  had  but  spit  in  her  face,  should  she 
not  be  ashamed  (shut  up)  seven  days?  Let  her  be  shut  out 
from  the  camp  seven  days."  Here  an  inference  is  made 
from  minor  to  major,  namely,  from  a  human  father's  to  the 
Lord's  disfavor. 

IV.  Talmudic  Terms. 

§  13. 

Every  ^Dim  hp  contains  two  things,  A  and  B,  standing 
in  certain  relations  to  each  other  and  having  different   degrees 


^Modern  jurisprudence  admits  also  a  certain  argument  which  is 
quite  analogous  to  the  principle  of  Kal  ve-chomer,  as  may  be 
seen  from  the  following  maxim,  quoted  by  Coke  on  Littleton,  260: 
"Quod  in  minori  valet,  vale  bit  in  majori ;  et  quod  in  majori  non 
valet  nee  valebit  in  minori."  "Wliat  avails  in  the  less,  will  avail  in 
the  greater ;  and  what  will  not  avail  in  the  greater,  will  not  avail 
in  the  less." 


132  Hermeneutics  op  the  Talmud. 

of  importance.  Of  these  two  things,  A,  which  in  Talraudic 
terminology  is  called  ID^D  (teaching)  is  expressly  subject  to  a 
certain  law  or  restriction,  which  by  way  of  inference  is  to  be 
transferred  to  B,  termed  n^^  (learning). 

An  inference  is  termed  ]*»"r  (a  judgment);  to  make  an  infer- 
ence jn  (to  judge).  The  peculiar  law  found  in  the  ID^Q  is 
called  jni  (to  be  judged  from),  while  the  law  finally  transferred 
to  the  ^oh  is  termed  ]nn  |D  H2T\  (the  result  of  the  inference). 

Thus,  in  the  biblical  inference  mentioned  above,  the  father's 
disfavor  is  the  TD^D,  the  Lord's  disfavor  is  ID^.  The  punish- 
ment in  consequence  of  a  father's  disfavor  (ny^ti^  D^DH  sS"I 
D'^D^)  is  the  jni,  and  the  final  decision  derived  from  this  infer- 
ence (D''D''  ny^ti^  n:iDn)  is  j^'in  jd  «3n. 

V.   Logical  and  Formal  Arrangement. 
§  14. 

Logically,  every  yp  (like  every  syllogism)  has  three  propo- 
sitions,   of  which  two  are  the  Premises  and  one  the  Conclusion. 

The  first  pre  juise  states,  that  two  certain  things,  A  and  B, 
stand  to  each  other  in  the  relation  of  major  and  minor  impor- 
tance. 

The  second  premise  states  that  with  one  of  these  two  things 
(A)  a  certain  restrictive  or  permissive  law  is  connected. 

The  conclusion  is  that  the  same  law  is  the  more  applicable 
to  the  other  thing  (B). 

The  first  premise  is  termed  ]>!  Tbx\T\  the  outset  of  the  infer- 
ence, or  S*r"n  ^Ip''^;/  the  rriost  essential  part  of  the  inference ; 
while  the  final  conclusion  is  called  ]•'!  DID  the  end  of  the 
tnference. 

The  formal  arrangement  of  these  three  propositions  differs, 
however,  from  this  logical  order,  as  a  V'p  is  usually  expressed 
by  two  compound  propositions,  one  of  which  is  the  antecedent 
and  the  other  the  consequent^  as  in  case  of  an  inference 
from  minor  to  major  : 

(n^'-'n)  mos  (^p)  '"^  "^vh^  nn 
(n^'-'nty)  niD^iy  jn  ij''«  (-non)  — ty  '':i^3 


The  Inference  from  Minor  and  Major.  133 

«  If  A  which  in  this  or  that  respect  is  of  minor  impor- 
tance, is  subject  to  a  certain  severity  of  the  law  ;  ought  not  B, 
which  is  of  major  importance,  be  the  more  subject  to  the  same 
severity?"   Or,    in  case  of  an  inference  frome  major  to  minor: 

(mt:s)  nniD  (nion)  — t:^  •':i'?d  no 
(-nt:i2^  pir«)  p^^  h^  «^  (^p)  '"^  '^"^^s 

''If  a  certain  allowance  is   made  by  the  law  in  the   case 
of  A,  which  is  of  major  importance  ;  ought  not  the  same  allow, 
ance  be  the  more  made  in  the  case  of  B,  which  is  of  minor 
importance  ?" 
VI.  Illustrations  of  inferences  from  minor  to    major. 

§   15. 

a.  In  Exodus  xxii.  13,  the  law  is  laid  down  that  if  a  man 
borrow  of  his  neighbor  an  animal  or  a  thing,  and  the  animal 
die  or  the  object  be  destroyed,  the  borrower  must  restore  the 
loss.  But  it  is  not  expressly  mentioned  in  this  law  whether  the 
borrower  was  also  responsible  in  cases  when  the  borrowed 
animal  or  thing  is  stolen.  The  liability  in  this  eventuality 
is  then  proved  by  way  of  an  inference  from  the  law  regarding 
a  (paid)  depositary  who,  according  to  Exodus  xxii.  9—11,  is 
not  bound  to  make  restitution  when  the  animal  intrusted  to 
his  care  died  or  became  hurt,  and  yet  is  held  responsible  in 
case  the  intrusted  thing  was  stolen  (dV^"'  ID^D  ^i:*"  2^:  DSl) 
The  inference  is  made  in  the  following  way : 

''If  the  depositary,  though  iree  from  responsibility  for 
damage  and  death,  is  still  bound  to  restore  the  thing  stolen 
from  him,  ought  not  the  borrower,  who  is  responsible  for  da- 
mage and  death,  to  be  the  more  bound  to  restore  the  thing 
stolen  from  him?"  In  this  inference  the  depositary  is  minor, 
the  borrower  major.     Baba  Metzia  95a. 

h.  By  a  similar  inference  it  is  proved  that  a  depositary 
has  to  make  restitution  in  cases  where  the  intrusted  thing  has 
become  lost,  though  the  law  only  speaks  of  his  responsibility 
for  theft  (Exodus  xxii.  11): 


134  Heumeneutics  of  the  Talmud. 

''If  he  has  to  make  restitution  for  the  t/ie/f, 
which  is  almost  an  accident  (as  the  greatest  vigilance  may 
not  always  prevent  it),  how  much  the  more  is  restitution  to  be 
made  for  >o:i/ig  (the  intrusted  object),  which  is  almost  a 
trespass  (since  he  was  deficient  in  the  necessary  care  and 
vigilance).  Here  nz^l^  is  minor,  riT'DS  major.  Baba  Metzia  94b. 

VII.   Illustration  of  an  inference  from  major  to  minor. 

§  16 
While  the  Sadducees  took  the  law  ''Eye  for  eye"  etc., 
(Exodus  xxi.  24),  literally  as  jus  talionis,  the  rabbinical  inter- 
pretation was,  that  a  limb  was  not  actually  to  be  maimed  for  a 
limb,  but  that  the  harm  done  to  the  injured  person  was  esti- 
mated and  a  pecuniary  equivalent  paid  by  the  offender.  Among 
other  arguments  in  support  of  this  interpretation  one  of  the 
rabbis  applied  the  inference  from  major  to  minor,  referring  to 
the  law  (Exodus  xxi.  29—30),  by  which,  under  certain  circum- 
stances, the  proprietor  of  a  beast  which  is  notably  dangerous 
and  which  has  killed  a  person,  is  judged  liable  to  the  death 
penalty;  but  the  capital  punishment  could  be  redeemed  by 
money.  Now,  if  the  law  expressly  admits  a  pecuniary  compen- 
sation in  a  case  where  the  guilty  person  deserved  capital  pun- 
ishment, how  much  the  more  is  a  pecuniary  compensation  admis- 
sible in  our  case  where  it  does  not  concern  capital  punishment  : 

pDD  s^s  v:]:  i^b  nn-'D  z^r\2n  tr:v'^  mpaa  rrii 
pDD  s^s  D^jy  i^b*:;  ^s  .n  jn  nn-'n  mv  ^s^t^  i^:^ 

Mechilta  to  Exodus  xxi.  24. 
XIII.  Restrictions  in  the  application  of  inferences. 

§  n 
Conclusions  made  by  an  inference  are  restricted  by  three 
rules:  1-st,  jnJD  nvr\b  pn  JO  S^^in  "it  is  sufficient  that  the 
result  derived  from  an  inference  be  equivalent  to  the  law  from 
which  it  is  drawn" ;  that  is  to  say,  the  law  transferred  to  B 
(the  major),  must  never  surnass  in  severity  the  original  law  in 
A  (the  minor),  from  which  the  inference  was  made. 


The  Inference  from  Minor  and  Major.  135 

Thus,  in  the  inference  made  in  the  Scripture  in  regard  to 
Miriam,  we  might  have  expected  that  the  time  of  her  exclusion 
from  the  camp  should  be  more  than  seven  days,  since  the  Lord's 
disfavor  is  of  more  consequence  than  a  human  father's;  never- 
theless, Scripture  says,  ^'Let  her  be  shut  out  from  the  camp  seven 
days,"  which  is  just  as  long  as  she  would  have  felt  humiliated  if 
her  father  had  treated  her  with  contumely.  On  this  passage 
the  restrictive  rule  just  mentioned  is  founded.  An  ample  appli- 
cation of  this  rule  is  found  in  Mishna  Baba  Kamma  II.  5. 

2d.  Another  restrictive  rule  is  jnn  ]D  plTiiy  pS  ''The  in- 
ference from  minor  to  major  is  not  to  be  applied  in  the  penal 
law." 

The  reason  for  this  rule  lies  in  the  possibility  that  the  con- 
clusions drawn  by  inference  might  have  been  erroneous,  so  that 
the  infliction  of  a  penalty  derived  from  such  a  conclusion  would 
not  be  justified.^ 

An  application  of  the  rule  jnn  JtD  ^^^T^"^  ]''«  is  made  in  Tal- 
mud Maccoth  5b,  to  refute  an  objection  to  the  rabbinical  inter- 
pretation of  the  law,  that  the  punishment  of  false  witnesses 
(Deuteronomy  xix.  19),  is  to  take  place  only  when  the  judg- 
ment against  the  falsely  accused  party  has  not  yet  been  executed. 
The  objection  to  this  interpretation  was  raised  by  way  of  an 
inference  from  minor  to  major: 

1  Quite  analogous  to  this  rabbinical  rule  is  that  established  in 
modern  law,  "that  penal  statutes  must  be  construed  strictly.  They  can 
not,  therefore,  be  extended  by  their  spirit  or  by  equity  to  any  other 
offenses  than  those  clearly  described  and  provided  for."  (See  Bouvier's 
Law  Dictionary,  article  Penal  Statutes). 

''According  to  Talmudic  interpretation,  however,  this  rule  is  derived 
from  the  Scripture,  in  which  the  law  sometimes  finds  it  necessary  to 
expressly  mention  a  case  in  which  the  punishment  is  to  be  inflicted, 
though  it  could  have  been  easily  found  by  a  mere  inference  from  an- 
other case.  Thus,  for  instance,  in  regard  to  the  law,  Exodus  xxi.  33,  we 
read  in  Mechilta  :  t^^N  m^^  -3  ^"n  T^^  Hin  nniS  sbx  "h  PN*  tT^S  nriQ^  ^31 

X-\r\  p  jTOiy  pN^ti*  nnbS  n-i3^  ^d  idx:  idp  \^'^r\  |d  n^^JV  p  mD« 

In  Talmud  Maccoth  5  t>,  the  same  principle  is  proved  in  a  similar 
way  from  Leviticus  xx,  17. 


136  Hermeneutics  op  the  Talmud. 

^'If  the  witnesses  are  to  be  put  to  death,  though  their  false  tes- 
timony has  not  caused  the  death  of  the  innocent,  how  much  the 
more  when  it  really  had  fatal  consequences?" 

But  tliis  quite  logical  objection  is  removed  by  the  axiom  j'lS 
]''"in  |D  ]'^^1)]^  '^No  penalty  can  be  inflicted  which  is  based 
upon  an  inference." 

3d.  A  third  restrictive  rule  in  the  application  of  inferences 
of  n"1p  is  laid  down  in  Mishna  Yadaim  iii.  2: 

or  as  the  rule  is  expressed  more  concisely  in  Talmud  Sabb.  132, 
and  Nazir  57:  riD^ID  V'p  \^11  ]''«  ''No  inferences  must  be  made 
from  traditionallaws  to  establish  a  new  law."* 

IX.  Refutation  of  inferences. 
§   18. 

Not  every  rC'lp  offered  in  the  Talmudic  discussions  of  the 
law  is  correct  and  valid.  We  sometimes  find  there  very  proble- 
matic and  even  sophistical  inferences  set  forth  merely  as  sup- 
positions or  hypotheses;  these  are,  however,  finally  refuted.  A 
refutation  of  a  n'lp  is  called  ^Dn"'S. 

Refutations  may  be  made  in  two  different  ways:  a.  Either 
the  correctness  of  the  premise  in  the  antecedent  is  disputed  by 
showing  that  A  (ID^D)  which  was  supposed  to  be  of  minor 
importance  (^p)  is  in  some  other  respects  really  of  major  im- 
portance (niDn);  or  b.  The  correctness  of  the  conclusion  in  the 
consequent  is  diputed  by  showing  that  the  peculiar  law  con- 
nected with  A  (tD^D)  can  not  be  transferred  to  B  ("TD^)  as 
it  is  not  transferred  to  0,  which  in  certain  respects  is  like  B. 

The  first  kind  of  refutation  is  called  i^jiii  SHp^ys  toil's  a 
refutation  of  the  most  essential  part  of  the  inference^  and  the  sec- 
ond kind  is  termed  S^n  fjlD^  «J3n^S  refutation  of  the  final 
cojiclusion  of  the  inference.  The  styles  of  expression  in  these  two 


'R.  Akiba,  however,  did  not  accept  this  restrictive  rule,  but  at- 
tempted to  make  inferences  even  from  traditional  laws  to  establish  a 
new  law.    See  Sabbath  132a.  Compare  also  Talm.  Jer.  Kiddushin  1,  2: 


The  Inference  from  Minor  and  Major.  137 

kinds  of  refutation   are   quite  different.     A  refutation  of  the 
premise  is  usually  expressed  in  the  following  way: 

(-jDi  -|D2  men)  piy  ^:^h^b  no 
(1^1  n^^2  mj2n  i:i^str)  n^2  ncsn 

''Why  has  A  that  particular  severe  provision  of  the  law  ? 
Because  it  is  of  ^najor  importance  in  this  or  that  respect.  But 
how  will  you  apply  it  to  B,  which  is  not  so  important  in  the  same 
respect?" 

The  refutation  of  the  final  conclusion  is  usually  expressed 
by  the  words,  pty  n''DV  ''il^S-  ''The  case  of  C  proves  it;"  viz.: 
that  such  a  conclusion  can  not  be  admitted,  since  C  is  of  equal 
importance  with  B,  and  still  the  restriction  of  A,  which  is 
intended  to  be  transferred  to  B,  is  not  applied  to  C. 

X.  Illustration  of  the  different  kinds  of  refutation. 

§  19. 

1.  It  is  well  known  that  the  law,  "thou  shalt  not  seethe 
a  kid  in  its  mother's  milk,"  is,  according  to  Talmudic  interpre- 
tation, a  general  prohibition  against  boiling  any  kind  of  meat 
in  any  kind  of  milk.  After  having  demonstrated  that  3^nn  "itT^ 
(meat,  which  in  contradiction  to  this  law  had  been  boiled  with 
milk),  is  forbidden  to  be  eaten  (n^"'::N*a  niDS),  it  is  undertaken 
to  prove  that  it  is  likewise  forbidden  to  make  any  other  use 
of  it  (ns^nn  mD«).  One  of  the  rabbis  tried  to  prove  this  by 
way  of  an  inference  from  n^ny  (the  fruits  of  a  tree  during  the 
first  three  years,  which  fruits  were  deemed  forbidden  to  be  used 
in  any  way  ni<ir\2  niDS).  The  inference  was  made  in  the  fol- 
lowing way  : 

nsina  nniDS  nn^'iiy  nn  niz^:  «^ty  nb^v  hd 

'  'If  those  fruits,  regarding  which 
no  law  had  been  violated,  are  forbidden  to  be  used  in  any 
way,  ought  not  meat  and  milk,  which,  in  violation  of  a  law, 
have  been  boiled  together,  the  more  be  forbidden  to  be  used 
in  any  way?" 

The  premise  in  this  inference  is  that  n^lj?  is  of  mmor 


138  Hermeneutics  of  the  Talmud 

importance  (hp)  compared  with  n"Z2',  but  this  premise  is  dis- 
puted by  demonstrating  that  in  certain  respects  it  was,  in  fact, 
of  ma/or  importance,  since  those  fruits  had  at  no  time  before 
been  permitted  to  be  used,  while  in  regard  to  ^"22  there  had 
been  a  time  (namely,  before  being  boiled  together),  when  the 
use  of  each  of  these  components  was  allowed: 

(n^:n2  nmD«  p^s^)  nn^-^  nv^  n^  nn'^n  s^  ptr  nh^v^  no 
nn%-in  nj;tr  ^b  n\"it^  n"3:i  na^n 

Chullin  115b;  Mechilta  to  Exodus  xxiii.  19. 

2.  Refutation  of  the  conclusion  in  the  inference.  An  illus- 
tration of  this  kind  of  refutation  is  furnished  in  Mishna  Pe- 
sachim  vi.  1,  2.  There  the  law  is  laid  down  that  if  the  eve  of 
riDS  happened  to  fall  on  a  Sabbath,  the  sacrificial  acts  with  the 
Paschal  lamb,  as  the  slaughtering,  sprinkling,  etc.,  were  allowed, 
though  such  acts  are  otherwise  regarded  as  labor  (n^S^D), 
while  certain  preparatory  acts  (as  carrying  the  lamb  to  the 
temple,  etc.),  though  not  regarded  as  real  labor,  but  only  as 
rnrtr  (incompatible  with  a  day  of  rest),  are  not  allowed.  This 
restriction  is  disputed  by  R.  Eliezer,  on  the  ground  of  the  fol- 
lowing inference : 

''If  slaughtering,  though  a  real  labor,  abrogates  the  Sab- 
bath, ought  not  things  not  regarded  as  real  labor  the  more  :^.b- 
rogate  the  Sabbath?" 

But  this  logical  conclusion  is  refuted  by  P.  Joshua: 

^\^2^  nwD  la  niDSi  n2^bt2  miyD  ^2  in^nntr  ^dt'  d"1'' 

''A  common  holiday  proves  that  this  conclusion  is  not  ad- 
missible, for  on  such  a  day  some  real  labors  (as  cooking,  baking, 
etc.),  are  permitted,  while  at  the  same  time  certain  actions, 
which  fall  under  the  category  of  ^\^2\^,  are  positively  pro- 
hibited." 

XI  REINSTATEMENT  OF  A  REFUTED  INFERENCE. 

§  20. 

When  an  inference  has  been  refuted  in  one  of  the  two  ways 

just  mentioned,  the  attempt  is  sometimes  made  to  defend  and 

retain  it  by  removing  the  objection  raised  in  the  refutation.  If 


The  Inference  from  Minor  and  Major.  139 

the  arguments  proffered  for  this  purpose  are  found  to  be  correct, 
the  original  inference  is  reinstated;  if  not,  the  refutation  is 
sustained  and  the  inference  finally  rejected. 

Thus,  for  instance,  in  regard  to  R.  Eliezer's  inference,  which 
R.  Joshua  refuted  by  the  objection  n^^V  ^'V,  R.  Eliezer,  in 
turn,  attempted  to  remove  this  objection  by  asking:  n''"'S"\  PID 
m^i^D^  mt^n  ''What  can  that  which  is  va/un/ary  ^iYOYe  against 
a  conmiandV  That  is  to  say,  if  nuri^  actions  are  not  allowed 
on  tD"l'',  it  must  be  remembered  that  they  concern  only 
Yoluntary  or  private  affairs,  while  the  prohibition  of  such 
actions  in  regard  to  the  Paschal  lamb  concerns  a  religious  duty 
which  is  expressly  commanded. 

R.  Joshua  was  silenced  by  this  point  of  argumentation,  and 
seemed  to  be  willing  to  withdraw  his  objection  to  R.  Eliezer's 
inference;  but  now  R.  Akiba  appeared  in  the  arena  to  defend 
R.  Joshua's  objection  by  showing  that  a  difference  between  mii^l 
and   T\Xi^  could  not  be  admitted.  He  said  s%-|ty  n"^Din   nSTH 

n^irn  ns  nnn  nrsi  m^tr  d^iITd  s-^m  m:it:  ''The  sprinkling 

(by  which  an  unclean  person  was  declared  to  be  again  clean) 
may  prove  it,  because  this  also  is  an  act  belonging  to  the  cate- 
gory of  nuir,  ^nd  at  the  same  time  concerns  a  command 
(since  the  performance  of  this  act  would  make  the  person  fit  to 
bring  his  Paschal  offering),  and  still  it  is  not  to  be  done  on  a 
Sabbath-day;  therefore,  you  should  n(.t  wonder  that  in  our  case 
those  other  acts  (the  carrying  of  the  Paschal  lamb,  etc.),  though 
concerning  a  ni^iD  and  only  m^^kT,  are  not  to  be  done  on  a 
Sabbath  day." 

A  repeated  attempt  of  R.  Eliezer  to  reinstate  his  infer- 
ence by  disputing  R.  Akiba's  new  objection,  having  been  frus- 
trated by  the  latter's  counter-arguments,  the  inference  was  fi- 
nally rejected. 

xn.     Sophistical  inferences. 

§21. 

In  conclusion, we  wish  to  call  attention  to  some  sophistical 
inferences  of  V'p  mentioned  in  the  Talinudic  literature,  which 
are  refuted  simply  by  an  argument  ad  absurdum. 


140  Hermeneutics  of  the  Talmud. 

One  of  these  inferences  is  quoted  in  the  Mishna  Yadaim  iv. 
7:  <'The  Sadducees  said,  We  have  a  strong  argument  against 
you  Pharisees.  You  teach  that  one  is  responsible  for  a  damage 
caused  by  his  ox  or  ass,  but  not  responsible  for  a  damage 
caused  by  his  slave  or  his  bondwoman;  is  this  not  contrary  to 
a  simple  rational  inference?" 

ipm  ^''•'n  ^ni^^  j'^i  1J''«  m^D  nnn  z^^^n  '•jstr  •'no^i  nay 

''If  I  be  responsible  for  my  animals  regarding  which  I  have 
no  religious  obligation,  how  much  more  must  I  then  be  respon- 
sible for  the  damage  caused  by  my  servants,  regarding  whom  I 
have  a  religious  obligation?" 

The  Pharisees  promptly  answered:  ''No 1 1  am  responsible 
for  my  animals,  which  have  no  free  will  and  deliberation,  but 
not  for  my  slaves,  who  have  knowledge  and  deliberation.  If  I 
offend  them,  they  may  go  and  deliberately  set  fire  to  my  neigh- 
bor's property.     Should  I  then  be  bound  to  pay?" 

Another  still  more  sophistical  yp  is  mentioned  in  Mass. 
Derech  Eretz  Rabba,  chapter  I.  A  certain  Jose  b.  Tadai,  of 
Tiberias,  tried,  in  the  presence  of  R.  Gamaliel,  to  ridicule  the 
application  of  inferences  in  ritual  laws  by  the  following 
paralogism: 

nnaa  niDS  ••:«  na  nniD  •»i«^  •'nt^'s  hd 
nnnn  niDS  r^^nn^  jn  ii\^  nn  mos  •'jstr  ty's  n^^s 

"If  the  marriage  with  one's  own  daughter  is  prohibited, 
although  the  marriage  with  her  mother  is  permitted,  how 
much  more  unlawful  must  it  be  to  marry  another  married 
woman's  daughter,  since  the  marriage  with  her  mother,  a  mar- 
ried woman,  is  positively  prohibited?" 

The  fallacy  in  this  inference  is  that  the  conclusion  contra- 
dicts the  premise.  The  premise  is  that  the  marriage  with  one's 
own  wife  is  lawful,  while  according  to  the  conclusion  any  mar- 
riage would  be  prohibited.  But  R.  Gamaliel  answered  caus- 
tically: "Go,  thou,  and  take  care  of  the  high-priest,  in  regard  to 
whom  it  is  written, Only  a  virgin fron  among  his  people  he  shall 
marry;  I  shall  then  take  care  ot  all  Israel."  That  is  to  say, 
show  me,  in  the  first  place,  how,  according  to  the  inference,  the 


The  Inference  from  Minor  and  Major.  141 

high-priest  could  enter  a  marriage,  as  Scripture  expressly  per- 
mits him  to  do,  and  I  shall  prove  the  same  permission  for  all 
Israelites. 

According  to  another  version,  R.  Gamaliel  excommunicated 
the  scoffing  questioner,  remarking:  p  ^21  '^^pV^  ^21  pJl  |^i< 
minn  ''No  inference  can  be  admitted  in  which  the  conclusion 
contradicts  the  law." 

A  masterpiece  of  sophistical  inferences  is  recorded  in  San- 
hedrin  17.  Referring  to  a  tradition,  according  to  which  none 
could  aspire  for  membership  in  the  ancient  Sanhedrin,  without 
having  given  a  proof  of  his  dialectic  ability  by  demonstrating, 
for  instance,  the  cleanness  of  those  eight  reptiles  which  the  law 
(Leviticus  xi.  29,  30),  expressly  declares  to  be  unclean,  one  of 
the  Amoraim  jokingly  remarked:  ''Ifl  had  been  living  at  the 
time  when  the  Sanhedrin  was  still  in  existence,  I  might  have 
aspired  for  membership  by  offering  the  following  inference: 

"  If  a  serpent,  though  killing  men  and  beasts,  and  thus  in- 
creasing ritual  uncleanness,  still  is  regarded  a  clean  animal;^ 
ought  not  a  reptile  that  does  not  kill  and  increase  uncleanness 
be  the  more  regarded  clean?" 

This  inference,  though  merely  intended  to  display  dialectic 
acumen,  is  earnestly  refuted  by  the  following  argumentum  ad 
absurdum-.  If,  according  to  the  first  premise  of  this  inference, 
a  serpent  ought  to  be  unclean  on  account  of  its  capability  to 
kill  a  person,  then  any  wooden  instrument  by  which  a  person 
can  be  killed  ought  to  be  unclean. 

This  inference  and  its  refutation  are  of  some  intrest  as  an 
instance  which  shows  clearly  that  many  ot  the  Talmudic  dis- 
cussions on  the  law  had  no  other  purpose  than  to  be  a  mental 
tournament,  in  wliich  the  rabbis  and  their  disciples  delighted 
to  exercise  their  intellectual  powers  and  exhibit  their  skill  and 
acuteness  in  the  art  of  reasoning  and  debating. 


*The  serpent  is,  of  course,  unclean  in  respect  to  food,  but  it  is  clean 
in  as  far  as  it  does  not  belong  to  those  eight  reptiles  concerning  which 
the  law  ordained  :  "Whoyoever  doth  touch  them,  when  they  are  dead, 
shall  be  unclean  until  the  even.** 


CHAPTER  II. 

THE  ANALOGY  OF  GEZERA  SHAYA. 

Rule  II. 

Introductory. 

§22. 

Analogy,  in  the  ordinary  sense  of  the  word,  denotes  such 
resemolance  between  things,  as  enables  us  to  assume  of  one 
what  we  know  of  the  other.  Although  conclusions  drawn 
from  analogy  do  not  in  general  afford  certai?ity^  but  only  some 
degree  of  probability  at  best,  much  recourse  is  often  taken  to 
such  conclusions  in  every  branch  of  human  knowledge,  espe- 
cially when  all  other  means  of  argumentation  fail. 

The  argument  from  analogy  is  also  admitted  as  an  aid  in 
modern  legal  interpretation,  either  to  determine  an  ambiguous 
expression  in  a  law,  or  to  decide  a  case  not  expressly  provided 
for  therein,  or  to  supply  a  defect  in  one  law  by  reference  to  the 
fuller  contents  of  another  law. 

The  analogy  between  two  laws  may  be  either  real  or  formal 
It  is  real  when  these  laws  are  of  the  same  nature  and  the  cases 
treated  of  in  them  resemble  each  other  in  material  points  and 
in  important  relations.  It  is  formal,  when  the  resemblance 
consists  merely  in  some  external  points  and  relations,  as  in 
the  wording  of  the  laws  or  in  the  connection  in  which  they  are 
set  forth.  Arguments  from  a  real  analogy  existing  between 
different  laws  are  very  often  applied  in  the  Rabbinical  interpre- 
tation. Such  an  analogy  is  termed  ir:f D  HD  of  which  we  shall 
speak  in  the  following  chapter.  But  the  Rabbis  also  admit  the 
argument  from  a  formal  or  external  analogy.  Whether  also 
this  kind  of  argumentation  be  in  accordance  with  logical  rea- 
soning, depends  upon  the  nature  of  the  conclusion  which  is 
intended  to  be  drawn  therefrom.  If  the  external  relations 
upon  which  the  argument  proceeds,  imply  also  an  internal 
relation  which  has  a  bearing  on  the  conclusion,  it  is  logical 
and  valid,  otherwise  it  is  not.     There  are  especially  two  rules 


The  Analogy  of  Gezera  Shava.  143 

of  Talmudical  interpretation  in  which  use  is  made  of  this  kind 
of  analogy.     These  are  termed:  1.  Gezera  Shava;  2.  Hakkesh. 

A.     GEZERA  SHAYA. 

I. — TERM,  CLASSIFICATION  AND  FORMULA. 

§  23. 

The  term  Gezera  Shava  (mty  nnn:i)  means  literally  either 
a  similar  section  (part)  or  a  similar  decision  (decree).  In  the 
Talmudic  phraseology  it  denotes  an  analogy  of  expressions,  that 
is,  an  analogy  based  on  identical  or  similar  words  occurring  in 
two  different  passages  of  Scripture.  The  Gezera  Shava  is 
used:  first^  as  an  exegetical  aid  to  determine  the  meaning  of  an 
ambiguous  expression  in  a  law;  second^  as  an  argument  in  con- 
struing laws  with  reference  to  each  other,  so  that  certain  provis- 
ions connected  with  one  of  them  may  be  shown  to  be  applicable 
also  to  the  other.  We  have,  then,  two  kinds  of  Gezera  Shava, 
and  in  order  to  distinguish  them  clearly  we  propose  to  call  the 
former  the  exegetical  and  the  latter  the  constructional  Gezera 
Shava.     The  usual  formula  for  both  kinds  of  Gezera  Shava  is: 

—  '^rb  nD.s^i ;«^  id«j 

]«:?  ri« '\pTb  HD 

Here  is  said: There  is  said:. . . . 

As  there, so  here. 

II. — THE  EXEGETICAL  GEZERA  SHAVA. 
§23. 

The  theory  of  the  exegetical  Gezera  Shava  is  expressed  in 
the  Talmudical  phrase  sometimes  used  in  connection  with  this 
kind  of  analogy:  trniSDH  JD  Dino  IID^"*  '^he  indefinite  is  to  be 
explained  by  the  definite,"  that  is  to  say,  if  an  expression  in  one 
passage  of  Scripture  is  used  ambiguously,  its  meaning  is  to  be 
ascertained  from  another  passage,  where  the  same  expression 
occurs  in  a  connection  in  which  it  is  clearly  defined. 

This  quite  rational  theory  is  also  adopted  in  modern  scien- 
tific exegesis   in  reference  to  parallel  fassa^ys,  and   is  in  some 


144  Hermeneutics  of  the  Talmud. 

measure  admitted  even  in  the  legal  interpretation  of  statutes 
and  documents.^ 

Examples  of  exegetical  Gezera  Shava: 

1.  In  Levit.  xvi.  29  the  law  relating  to  the  Day  of  Atone- 
ment enjoins  DD^mti^SJ  n«  liyn  ^'Ye  shall  afflict  your  souls," 
without  defining  the  nature  of  this  affliction.  But  the  expres- 
sion njy  occurs  in  other  passages  in  a  connection  where  it  evi- 
dently refers  to  the  sufiering  of  want  and  hunger,  as  for  instance 
in  the  passage  "la'^yn^l  ^JJ^'I  Deut.  viii.  3.  (Compare  also  Psalm 
XXXV.  13  •»ti'SJ  m^2  ^JT^jy).  Hence  the  expression  in  our  pas- 
sage is  to  be  taken  in  the  meaning  which  tradition  has  put  on 
it,  /.  e.j  as  a  term  of  fasting. 

pnyn  •'irj;  ]^n^  no 

Siphra  to  Levit.  xvi.,  and  Talmud  Yoma,  74. 

2.  In  the  law  restricting  the  time  of  slavery,  Exod.  xxi. 
2,  the  expression  •»'i::j;  123;  is  somewhat  ambiguous,  as  it  might 
mean  either  a  servant  of  a  Hebrew  (a  heathen  slave  belonging 
to  an  Israelite)  or  a  Hebrew  servant  (an  Israelite  who  has  been 
sold  as  a  slave).  That  the  expression  is  to  be  taken  in  the  lat- 
ter sense   (the  word  •^i^y  being  here  used  as  an  adjective  and 


*  "One  of  the  chief  rules  in  ascertaining  the  meaning  of  doubtful 
words  is  to  try  first  to  ascertain  the  meaning— from  other  passages  of 
the  same  text  in  which  the  ambiguous  word  occurs,  so  used  that  it 
leaves  no  doubt — by  parallels."  Francis  Lieber,  ''Legal  and  PoUtical 
Hermeneutics,"  page  91. — The  following  rule  of  interpretation,  which 
is  quoted  in  * 'Broom's  Legal  Maxims,"  page  586,  comes  still  nearer  to 
the  character  of  Talmudical  Gezera  Shava :  '  'Where  an  act  of  Parlia- 
ment has  received  a  judicial  construction  putting  a  certain  meaning  on 
its  words,  and  the  Legislature  in  a  subsequent  act  in  -pari  materia  uses 
the  same  words,  there  is  a  presumption  that  the  Legislature  used  those 
words  intending  to  express  the  meaning  which  it  knew  had  been  put 
upon  the  ^Tords  before,  and  unless  there  is  something  to  rebut  that  pre- 
sumption the  act  should  be  so  construed,  even  if  the  words  were  such 
that  they  might  originally  have  been  construed  otherwise." 


The  Analogy  of  Gezera  Shava.  145 

not  as  a  noun)  is  proved  by  a  reference  to  Dent.  xv.  12, where 
in  a  repetition  of  the  same  law  the  servant  is  called  "'1IJ?n  ^TIX 
^'thy  Hebrew  brother."^ 

n2"TD  ain^n  ^sntr*"  ]zz  ]h'b  no 
n::'TD  zinzn  ^«n:r^  ]2n  j«::  C]S 

Mechilta  to  Exodus  xxi. 

III. — THE  CONSTRUCTIONAL  GEZERA  SHAVA. 
§   25 

While  the  exegetical  analogy  is  limited  to  the  purpose  of 
ascertaining  the  meaning  of  an  ambiguous  word,  the  construc- 
tional Gezera  Shava  intends  to  supply  an  omission  in  one  law 
by  the  more  explicit  provisions  of  another  law.  For  this  pur- 
pose use  is  made  of  an  identical  characteristic  word  occurring 
in  both  laws.  By  showing  that  this  characteristic  word  has 
some  bearing  on  certain  provisions  made  in  one  case,  it  is  ar- 
gued that  the  same  provisions  must  apply  also  in  the  other 
case. 

IV.  — ILLUSTRATIONS. 

§  26. 
1.  Hillel,  the  elder,  who  first  mentioned  this  rule  of  inter- 
pretation, applied  it  in  the  following  case:  The  eve  of  the  Pe- 
sach  festival  once  happened  to  be  on  a  Sabbath,  and  the  question 
was  whether  it  should  be  permitted  to  sacrifice  the  Paschal 
lamb  on  such  a  day.  Among  other  arguments  to  prove  the 
permission,  Hillel  referred  also  to  the  rule  of  Gezera  Shava. 
He  argued:  In  the  law  concerning  the  daily  offering  it  is  said 
(Num.  xxiii.  2)  that  it  was  to  be  brought  n^'lD^  ''in  its  due 
season,"  and  also  in  the  law  regarding  the  Paschal  lamb  we 

^The  ancient  versions,  as  well  as  the  modern  commentaries  on  the 
Bible,  fully  coincide  with  the  Rabbinical  interpretation  of  this  expres- 
sion. Strange  enough,  Saalschuetz,  in  his  "Mosaisches  Recht,"  page 
702,  tries  to  defend  the  other  interpretation  so  promptly  refuted  by  the 
Rabbis,  and  claims  that  nny  *13y  refers  to  a  certain  class  of  heathen 
slaves  in  the  service  of  a  Hebrew.  Compare  Mielziner's  "Die  Verhaelt- 
Tiisse  des  Sklaven  bei  den  alteu  Hebraern,"  paj^e  'J8. 


146  Hermeneutics  of  the  Talmud. 

read:  The  children  of  Israel  shall  keep  the  Passover  viyica 
''in  its  due  season."  (Num.  ix.  2.)  But  concerning  the  daily- 
offering  the  law  expressly  provides  that  it  was  to  be  brought 
also  on  the  Sabbath  day.  (Num.  xxviii.  10.)  The  expression 
'nj;iDi  then  means  that  the  offering  must  take  place  at  the  ap- 
pointed time  under  all  circumstances,  even  on  a  Sabbath;  there- 
fore, the  same  expression  nj;iD3  in  regard  to  the  Paschal 
lamb  likewise  enjoins  that  the  offering  take  place  at  the  time 
appoined,  even  on  a  Sabbath  day. 

TDn2  nyiD  -iDSi"!  nD33  ^^v^r2  nt:sj 

nz^n  ns  nnn  tdhh  mo«n  nyiD  na 

nn^n  n«  nnn  nosa  niDsn  nyiD  Cjs 

Pesachim,  page  66  a. 

2.  Another  example,  taken  from  the  civil  law,  may  here 
be  added  to  illustrate  the  application  of  the  Gezera  Shava  in 
construing  a  law  which  appears  to  be  defective. 

In  Exod.  xxii.  6-8,  and  9-12,  are  contained  two  different 
laws  concerning  the  safe-keeping  of  the  property  of  a  fellow- 
man.  The  traditional  interpretation  correctly  distinguishes 
between  these  two  laws.  The  first  treats  of  a  gratuitous  guar- 
dian, while  the  other  refers  to  a  paid  depositary  who  has  a 
greater  responsibility  than  the  former.  Now,  the  first  law 
seems  to  be  somewhat  defective.  It  provides  that  if  the  ob- 
jects intrusted  have  been  stolen  from  the  house  of  the  guardian 
''he  shall  be  brought  to  the  judges — that  he  has  not  put  his 
hand  to  his  neighbor's  goods,"  but  nothing  is  said  of  the  way 
in  which  he  was  to  prove  this,  neither  is  it  said  whether  he  was 
free  from  making  restitution  if  he  succeeded  in  proving  this. 
The  Rabbis  supply  this  defect  by  means  of  a  Gezera  Shava. 
They  refer  to  the  second  law  in  which  (verse  10)  the  same 
phrase  occurs,  "that  he  has  not  put  his  hand  to  his  neighbor's 
goods."  Here  the  phrase  is  introduced  by  the  words,  "an  oath 
of  the  Lord  shall  be  between  them  both,"  and  is  followed  by  the 
words,  "and  shall  not  make  restitution."  Hence,  according  to 
this  analogy,  the  phrase  in  the  first  case  must  also  be  supplied 


The  Analogy  of  Gezera  Shava.  14Y 

viz. :  He  shall  be  brought  before  the  judges  to  take  an  oath  '  that 
he  did  not  act  fraudulently,  which  oath  frees  him  from  making 
restitution. 

Mechilta  to  Exod.  xxii.,  and  Baba  Metzia  41b. 

The  examples  given  above  illustrate  the  process  and  cha- 
racter of  most  of  the  Gezeroth  Shavoth  which  are  quoted  in  the 
Talmud  in  the  name  of  the  great  authorities  of  the  Mishnic  per- 
iod. The  external  analogy  (the  parity  of  expressions)  from 
which  the  argumentation  proceeds,  is  there  generally  of  such  a 
nature  as  to  imply  also  an  internal  or  real  analogy  which  jus- 
tifies the  conclusion  to  be  drawn  from  it. 

Usually  the  two  words  which  form  the  basis  for  a  Gezera 
Shava  are  exactly  alike,  but  sometimes  even  such  words  are 
used  for  this  purpose  which,  though  different  in  expression,  are 
identical  in  their  meaning.  Thus,  for  instance,  a  certain  ana- 
logy is  occasionally  formed  on  the  basis  of  the  expressions  'yo^ 
\Ts'2T\  '^the  priest  shall  returfi"  (Levit.  xiv.  39),  and  jriDn  fc<31 
''the  priest  shall  come^^  {ibid.^  44),  since  the  verb  ''to  return" 
is  almost  identical  with  the  verb  "to  come"  (as  the  former 
means  to  come  again.) 

Siphra  to  Levit  xiv.,  and  very  often  quoted  in  the  Talmud. 

V. — THE  EXORBITANT  GEZERA  SHAVA. 

§  2t 

There  is  a  peculiar  kind  of  Gezera  Shava  sometimes  resort- 
ed to,  especially  by  Amoraim,  which  is  quite  difierent  from 
the  rational  character  of  the  analogies  generally  used  by  the 
Tanaim.  Its  peculiarity  consists  in  this,  that  the  argument 
from  a  parity  of  expressions  is  also  admitted  in  cases  where 
the  two  laws  or  passages,  compared  with  each  other,  have  noth- 
ing   in  common  except  a  single,  often  very  insignificant  word 


^The  Spptuagint  already  supplied  the  passage  in  tliis  way  by  adding 
to  "ho  shall  appear  before  the  judges"  the  words  wai  o/zezVar ''and  he 
shall  swear." 


148  ;  Hermeneutics  of  the  Talmud. 

which  has  not  the  least  natural  bearing  on  the  conclusion  to  be 
drawn  therefrom. 

It  is  obvious  that  arguments  from  such  mere  verbal  ana- 
logies easily  result  in  what  is  termed  in  Logic  a  fallacy^  or 
sophistical  conclusion.  It  must,  however,  be  stated  that  the 
Amoraim  never  used  such  purely  verbal  analogies  for  the 
purpose  of  deducing  a  new  law  from  Scripture,  but  merely  as 
an  attempt  to  find  a  Scriptural  support  for  an  opinion  expressed 
by  one  of  the  authorities  in  the  Mishna.^ 

This  kind  of  Gezera  Shava  is  externally  characterized  by 
being  usually  introduced  by  this  peculiar  formula  """D"^s^"lN 
or  """D"nDi  ''that  is  derived  from,"  followed  by  the  two 
identical  words  on  which  the  analogy  in  question  is  assumed  to 
be  based. 

VI.  ILLUSTRATIONS  OF  EXORBITANT  USES  OF  GEZERA  SHAVA. 

§  28. 
a.  In  Mishna  Sanhedrin  I.  1,  it  is  stated  that  criminal 
cases  involving  corporal  punishment  (stripes)  could  be  decided 
by  a  minor  court  of  three  judges,  but  according  to  the  opinion 
of  R.  Ishmael,  such  cases  required  a  higher  criminal  court  of 
twenty-three  judges.  The  reason  for  this  divergence  of  opinion 
was,  probably,  that  this  Rabbi  regarded  the  infliction  of  corpo- 
ral punishment  as  too  serious  a  matter  to  be  left  to  the  deci- 
sion of  a  civil  court  of  three;  as  a  criminal  case  it  ought,  like 
a  case  of  capital  punishment,  to  be  judged  by  the  higher  court 
of  twenty-three.  But  the  Gemara,  commenting  on  this  Mishna, 
wants  to  know  the  Scriptural  ground  on  which  R.  Ishmael 
based  his  analogy,  and  in  answer  to  this  question  the  Babylo- 
nian Amora,  R.  Ashi,  thinks  that  he  can  find  such  a  basis  in 
the  word  y*^-i  ''the  guilty"  or  criminal,  which  occurs  as  well  in 
the  law  referring  to  corporal  punishment  (Deut.  xxv.  2)  as  in 
that  regarding  the  execution  of  capital  punishment.  (Num. 
XXXV.  31.) 

mn^D  ^::''^nD  ytrn  ^trn  s'ts 

Talmud  Sanhedrin  10. 


'Compare  Z.  Frankel's  * 'Palaestlnishe  und  Alexandrinische  Schrift 
forshung,"  page  20. 


The  Analogy  of  Gezera  Shava.  149 

b.  Mishna  Kiddushin  I.  1  lays  down  the  law  that  one  of 
the  means  to  contract  marriage  was  TiD^,  that  is,  the  giving  of 
a  piece  of  money  or  its  value  to  the  woman,  with  the  express  in- 
tention of  engaging  her  for  this  consideration  as  his  wife.  The 
Gemara  asks  for  a  Biblical  basis  of  this  law,  and  the  following 
answer  is  given:  The  Law,  in  speaking  of  marriage,  uses  the 
expression  nt^S  1^"*^  np^  ''^  ''if  a  man  take  a  wife"  (Deut.  xxii. 
13);  but  np^  "to  iake'^  also  means  ^'to  acquire'''  property,  ^  and 
is  used  elsewhere  in  connection  with  money  given  in  considera- 
tion for  the  acquisition  of  property  •'Jdd  TO  Pnti^n  irDOTinj  (Gen. 
xxiii.  13)  J  hoGce  also  a  wife  is  acquired  by  means  of  money. 

jnsy  mt^D  nn^'p  rw^^^^  noi 

Talmud  Kiddushin  2a. 

As  to  illustrations  of  Gezeroth  Shavoth  of  a  still  more  de- 
cidedly sophistical  character,  we  refer  to  the  following  two 
examples  in  which  an  argument  from  analogy  is  based,  in  one 
instance,  on  an  identical  pronoun  (n^)  and  in  the  other  on  an 
identical  adverb  (Dti^),  occurring  in  two  laws  or  passages  of  to- 
tally ditferent  nature  and  contents." 

Talmud  Chagiga,  4a. 


'In  the  Pentateuch,  however,  the  word  npb  nowhere  has  the  mean- 
ing of  "to  acquire  or  to  buy;"  it  occurs  in  this  meaning  only  a  few- 
times  in  some  of  the  other  books  of  the  Bible  (3  Sam.  iv.  6  ;  Prov.  xxxi. 
16,  and  Nehem  x.  83  );  but  in  the  Talmudic  idiom  it  is  almost  exclusi- 
vely used  in  this  sense.— The  formality  of  contracting  marriage  by 
means  of  a  piece  of  money  was  probably  of  a  late  origin,  and  was  per- 
haps influenced  by  a  similar  Roman  custom— the  nuptials  by  coemptio. 
The  probability  of  such  an  influence  gains  somegroundif  we  compare 
tlie  expression  of  the  Mishna  nS^n  "iLDK^n  5)033  D^DIT  Ht'TL^'^  H^JpJ  ^E^'^^•^ 
with  the  corresponding  expression  used  by  Gajus  I.,  §  IIU,  in  speaking 
of  the  Roman  custom  :  "Feminae  olim  tribus  modis  in  manum  conve- 
niebant :  usu,  farreo,  coemptione."  It  is  moreover  evident  that  the 
civil  law  of  the  Mishna,  though  in  doctrines  and  principles  so  widely 
ditferent  from  the  Roman  law,  adopted  several  legal  formalities  from 
the  latter  and  modified  them  according  to  the  leading  Jewish  principles. 

^A  very  extensive  use  of  this  kind  of  G«zera  Shava  was  mad© 
eep'^cially  in  the  Agada  (the  homiletical  explanation  of  moral  and 
historical  passages  of  Scripture),  where  it  was  not  restricted  by  any 
rules.  There  it  gave  rise  to  many  of  tliose  most  fanciful  interpretations 
and  legendary  narratives  quoted  in  the  Midrash   and   Talmud. 


160        Hermeneutics  of  the  Talmud. 

n^:n2  niDS  n»i  ]b:n 

Aboda  Zara  29b. 
VII.    restrictions  in  the  use  of  gezera  shava. 
§.   29. 

The  exorbitancies  which  some  teachers  permitted,  themselves 
to  make  use  of  in  the  application  of  the  Gezera  Shava,  served 
only  to  demonstrate  the  weakness  of  the  theory  of  basing  ar- 
guments upon  an  analogy  of  expressions.  It  having  been 
found  that  such  arguments  easily  run  into  vague  fallacies,  this 
whole  theory  seems  to  have  been  slighted  by  many.  That  such 
must  have  been  actually  the  case  is  evident  from  the  repeated 
admonitions  which  several  prominent  teachers  addressed  to 
their  contemporaries:  ^^Do  not  look  slightingly  upon  arguments 
from  the  analogy  of  Gezera  Shava,  since  very  important  in- 
junctions of  the  traditional  law  can  derive  their  Scriptural  au- 
thority in  no  other   way  than  by  means  of  such   an  analogy. "» 

But  as  an  arbitrary  application  of  the  analogy  of  Gezera 
Shava  could  easily  lead  to  misuse,  it  was  found  necessary  to 
subject  it  to  some  restrictions.  This  was  done  by  the  following 
rules  : 

1.  The  identical  expression  occurring  in  two  different  laws 
must  at  least  in  one  of  thembenJSIJ::^  ''empty,"  that  is,  seemingly 
superfluous,  or  pleonastic,  and  not  already  engaged  for  another 
deduction  of  the  traditional  interpretation,  to  enable  it  to  be 
used  for  an  analogy  of  Gezera  Shava.  Thus,  for  instance,  inDeut. 
xxiii.  3,  the  law  provides  that  a  bastard  "shall  not  enter  into 
the  congregation  of  the  Lord,  even  to  the  tenth  ge?ieration.''^  Im- 
mediately after  this  law  follows  another,  with  a  similar  provis- 
ion, in  regard  to  an  Ammonite  or  Moabite:  ^^ Even  to  the  tenth 
generation  they  shall  not  enter  into  the  congregation  of  the 
Lord /<?r  evcr.'^  The  identical  expression  in  both  cases  are  the 
characteristic  words,  "even  to  the  tenth  generation."  But  in 
the  second  case  this  expression  seems  to  be  somewhat  superflu- 
ous, or  "empty,"  since  the  emphatic   words   "for  ever"   which 


^'IDI  "l^ryn  Th>\>  ni^  n"in:i  \~in  5^^;  n^^yS  Talmud  Klierithoth.  5cr.  Tliis 
admonition  is  there  repeated  in  the  mime  <»f  four  different  teachers. 


The  Analogy  of  GezepvA  Siiava.  151 

are  added  here  exclude  even  the  latest  generations  of  an  Am- 
monite or  Moabite  from  the  congregation.  The  expression  is 
then  assumed  to  have  been  used  here  for  the  purpose  of  inti- 
mating an  analogy  of  Gezera  Shava.  As  the  phrase,  ''even  to 
the  tenth  generation,"  is  here  clearly  defined  to  mean/^r  ever 
or  the  latest  generations  {ten  being  a  round  number  taken  to 
signify  perfection  and  completeness),  so  the  identical  expres- 
sion in  the  former  law  must  be  likewise  taken  in  this  sense — 
a  bastard  and  his  descendants  are  for  ever  disqualified  from 
entering  the  community  of  Israel.^ 

Siphre  to  Deut.,  section  259;  compare  also  Talmud  Jeba- 
moth,  78b.  An  other  example  is  found  in  Tal.  Chagiga  9a. 

A  Gezera  Shava  in  this  case  is  termed  inS  T^D  njSID 
< 'empty  on  one  side,"  and  is  regarded  admissible,  but  may  still 
be  rejected  for  certain  reasons.  Only  when  the  identical  ex- 
pression is  found  to  be  superfluous  in  both  laws  under  consi- 
deration, ]''"n'i*  "^r^D  nilS'lD,  is  the  analogy  regarded  as  irrejec- 
table.  But  if  no  pleonasm  is  recognizable  in  either  of  the  two 
passages  of  the  law,  no  analogy  can  be  formed  between  them 
because  of  an  identical  expression  occuring  in  each  of  them. 
Baba  Kama  25b;  Jebamoth  70a;  Nidda  22b;  Sabbath  131a.  ' 

2.  The  second  restrictive  rule  is  less  artificial  and  answers 
the  purpose  better  than  the  former.  It  is  this:  i^"l  p  D"fi<  ps 
IDi^D  (Pesachim  66;  Nidda  19b)  "No  one  is  permitted  to 
reason  from  a  Gezera  Shava  of  his  own."  While  the  applica- 
tion of  the  logical  inferences  of  Kal  Yechomer  could  be  left  to 
the  discretion  of  the   teachers  of  the  law,  the  use  of  the  un- 


^That  is,  according  to  Rabbinical  interpretation,  they  are  not  per- 
mitted to  intermarry  with  Israelites. 

''The  TJalmud  further  makes  many  nice  distinctions  in  regard  to 
this  n^'DID,  which  however,  are  too  intricate  and  subtle  to  be  treated 
here.  Those  who  take  an  interest  in  the  decails  of  this  subject  will 
consult  with  advantage  Dr.  H.  S.  Hirschfeld :  Halachische  Exegese 
p.   462— 4G7. 


152  Hermeneutics  of  the  Talmud. 

certain  conclusions  from  an  analogy  of  expression  had  neces- 
sarily to  be  restrained.  Such  an  analogy  must  be  sustained  by 
the  authority  of  tradition  in  order  to  be  valid  and  conclusive, 
or  as  a  post-Talmudic  addition  to  this  rule  explains:  ''One  must 
have  received  the  analogy  from  his  teacher,  and  the  teacher 
from  his  teachers,  up  to  the  time  of  the  highest  legislative 
authority." 

This  rule,  however,  hardly  meant  to  say,  as  many  interpreters 
understand  it,  that  either  the  special  application  of  a  Gezera 
Shava  in  a  certain  case  must  have  been  handed  down,  or  the 
identical  expression  on  which  the  analogy  is  based  must  have 
been  pointed  out  by  tradition.  If  so,  it  is  difficult  to  perceive 
how  so  many  controversies  could  have  been  raised  in  the  Tal- 
mud in  which  analogies  of  Gezera  Shava  are  set  forth  and 
disputed,  or  withdrawn  and  replaced  by  others. 

The  true  meaning  of  that  rule  seems  rather  to  be  that  no 
new  laws  are  to  be  deduced  from  Scripture  by  means  of  a 
Gezera  Shava,  out  that  such  analogies  could  be  only  ap- 
plied for  the  purpose  of  offering  a  biblical  support  to  a  law 
which  already  had  the  sanction  of  tradition.  Such  a  support 
might  be  found  in  one  way  or  another,  and  hence  arose  the 
difference  of  opinion  in  regard  to  some  analogies.^ 

B.     H  E  C  K  E  S  H. 

VIII.  TERM  AND  THEORY. 
§  30. 

There  is  another  kind  of  analogy,  somewhat  similar  to 
Gezera  Shava,  which,  though  not  expressly  mentioned  among 
the  thirteen  rules  of  R.  Ishmael,  was  generally  adopted  and 
very  frequently  applied  in  the  Talmudic  interpretation  of  the 
law;  it  is  termed  Heckesh. 

The  word  typ%"i,  derived  from  the  verb  t^^'^pn,  to  compare, 
means  originally  a  comparison^  an  a?ialogy^  in  which  general 
sense  it  also  occurs;  ^  but  in  the  Talmudic  terminology  it 
usually      denotes     a     particular     kind    of      analogy,     based 

^Compare    Frankel :    "Ueber  palaestinische  und  Alexandrinisc he 
Schriftforshung  p.    16,    Note  G  and  p.  20. 

'For  instance,  Talmud  Jerushalmi  Pesachim  vi.  1, 


The  Analogy  of  Heckesh.  153 

on  the  close  connection  of  two  subjects  in  one  and  the  same 
passage  of  the  Law. 

The  theory  of  this  peculiar  analogy  is  that  where  two 
subjects  are  connected  in  the  law  by  a  common  predicate,  the 
same  provisions  otherwise  made  in  regard  to  one  of  them  are 
under  certain  circumstances  applicable  also  to  the  other. 

Within  certain  limits  this  theory  is  not  inconsistent  with 
logical  reasoning,  since  the  connection  of  two  subjects  by  a 
common  predicate  indicates  that  they  in  some  respects  have  a 
relation  to  each  other.  In  modern  rules  of  legal  interpreta- 
tion also  is  a  maxim:  *  ^Coupling  words  together  shows  that 
they  ought  to  be  understood  in  the  same  sense,  "i  But  in 
their  endeavor  to  provide  every  traditional  law  with  a  Biblical 
support,  the  rabbis  sometimes  carried  also  this  theory  beyond 
its  legitimate  limits  and  beyond  the  natural  scope  of  the 
written  law. 

IX.    ILLUSTRATIONS. 
§    31. 

The  following  examples  will  illustrate  the  different  modes 
in  which  the  theory  of  Heckesh  is  applied: 

a.  According  to  the  traditional  law,  women  are  exempted 
from  the  performance  of  all  periodical  rites  and  religious  duties 
incumbent  on  male  Israelites.  In  regard  to  prohibitory  com- 
mandments, however,  no  difference  is  made  between  man  and 
woman.  Her  obligation  in  this  respect  is  derived  by  the  analo- 
gy of  Heckesh  from  the  words  of  Scripture  (Numbers  v.  6). 
''When  ^man  or  woman  shall  commit  any  sin,"  etc.,  in  which 
passage  women  are  placed  in  one  category  with  men  in  regard 
to  a  trespass  against  the  law. 

Kiddushin   35a. 
b.     Among  other  rules  and   regulations   concerning   civil 
and  criminal  courts,  the  traditional  law  provides  that   the  ses- 
sions of  a  court  must  be  opened  in  day  time  only;    and  further, 


'Copulatio  verborum  indicat  acceptioiiem  in  eodem  sensu.  Bacon, 
Max.  Reg.   3;   Broom,  Max.  3d,  Loud,  edition,  523. 


154  Heemeneutics  of  the  Talmud. 

that  blindness  disables  a  man  from  acting  as  one  of  the  judges. 
The  reason  for  these  two  provisions  is  obvious  enough.  But  their 
Biblical  support  is  offered  by  K.  Meir  in  the  following  more  in- 
genious than  natural  deduction.  He  says:  The  Law,  in  speak- 
ing of  the  judicial  functions  of  certain  priestly  courts,,  eujoins 
that  ' 'by  their  word  shall  every  controversy  and  every  injury 
be  decided"  y:i:  ^dt  y^^  ^75  H'^H"'  (Deuteronomy  xxi.  5). 
' 'Controversy"  refers  to  civil  litigations,  and  ''injury"  refers  to 
the  plague  of  leprosy  (which  in  Leviticus  xiii.  8,  is  termed  y:ij 
and  was  to  be  investigated  by  the  priest).  Both  kinds  of  cases 
being  connected  in  this  law,  they  must  be  analogous  to  each 
other  also  in  regard  to  their  inveptigation.  As  the  blind  would 
not  be  the  proper  man,  and  night  not  the  proper  time  for  the 
investigation  of  a  case  of  leprosy  (Leviticus  xiii.  6),  so  ought 
day  to  be  the  proper  time  for  the  trial  of  any  case  of  litigation, 
and  the  blind  not  be  admitted  to  judge  such  a  case. 

u'^^'i.ih  n''2''"i  D'^pD 

Sanhederin  34,  b. 
e.  The  traditional  permission  to  cut  off  the  sheaf  of  the 
first  fruits  for  the  purpose  of  the  wave  offering  on  the  16th  day 
of  iS  issan,  even  if  that  day  happened  to  be  on  a  Sabbath,  is 
based  by  R.  Ishmael  on  the  following  passage  (Exodus  xxxiv. 
21),  nuii^n  T^*p21  ^''nrii  '^lu  the  time  Q,iploiighi7ig  2.\i^reapi7ig 
thou  Shalt  rest  on  the  seventh  day."  Ploughmg  is  under  all 
circumstances  an  optional  (private)  act,  since  it  is  nowhere 
commanded  to  be  done  for  a  religious  purpose.  Hence,  also 
the  prohibition  of  reaping  on  a  Sabbath  day  refers  only  to  the 
optional  reaping  for  private  purposes,  but  not  where  it  is  to  be 
done  in  fulfillment  of  a  religious  duty: 

m:;Q  «^nt!i^  noiyn  T:ip  «::'' 

Mishna  Shebiith  I.  4.  Menachoth  72. 

X.    HECKESH  FROM  PREDICATES. 
§    32. 
The  analogy  of  Heckesh  is  also  made  from   two  predicates 


The  Analogy  of  Heckesh.  155 

belongiri-  to  cue  sul)jcct.  In  this  case,  the  yerbs  constituting 
the  common  predicate  are  treated  as  verbal  nouns.  Such  a 
Heckesh  is,  for  instance,  applied  to  prove  that  a  wife  may  be 
taken  in  matrimony  by  means  of  a  written  contract  of  marriage 
which  is  handed  to  her.  The  law  (Deuteronomy  xxiv.  2),  in 
speaking  of  a  case  where  a  divorced  woman  contracts  a  second 
marriao-e,  uses  the  words:  nn^m  n^'J^l  -when  she  has  ^./^r/^^ 
out  of  his  house  she  may  become  another  man's  wife.'  As  tne 
departing  out  of  his  house  (divorce)  is  by  means  of  a  written 
document  (bill  of  divorcement),  so,  also,  the  becoming  a  wile 
may  be  effected  by  means  of  a  document  written  for  that  pur- 
pose. 

Talmud  Kiddushin  5.     As  to  other  examples  compare  B. 
Kamma,   U^,,    and  Chagiga,  ^b, 

XI.  HECKESH  IRREFUTABLE. 
§  33. 
ArgLimcuts  from  Heckesh  are,  in  general, regarded  as  being 
more  conclusive  than  those  from  Gezera  Shava,  the  latter 
admitting  of  a  refutation,  but  not  the  former.^  But  as 
Gezera  Shava,  so  also  Heckesh  could  be  applied  only  for  the 
purpose  of  supporting  a  traditional  law. 

M^rJviTy  r^^^  X^  Menachoth  82b;  Baba  Kamma  I06b.  Con- 
cerning the  prevalence  of  one  or  the  other  of  these  two  kinds  oi 
analogy  in  cases  where  they  seem  to  be  in  conflict  with  eacn 
other,  compare  the  divergence  of  opinions  in  Gittin  41,  and  Zebachim  4». 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE  GENERALIZATION^  OF  SPECIAL  LAWS. 


Rule  hi,  Binyan  Ab. 


I.     Theory  and  Term. 
§  34. 


It  is  an  established  principle  of  modern  interpretation  of 
laws:  ^'When  the  law  is  special,  but  its  reason  general,  the  law 
is  to  be  understood  generally" i.  This  principle  is  also  applied 
in  the  rabbinical  legal  interpretation,  as  may  be  seen  from  the 
following  example:  In  Deut.  xxiv,  6,  the  law  provides  ''No 
man  shall  take  the  mill  or  the  upper  millstone  as  pledge:  for 
he  taketh  a  man's  life  to  pledge."  This  law  is  special,  prohib- 
iting certain  specified  utensils,  the  hand-mill  and  the  mill-stones, 
to  be  taken  as  pledges. 

The  reason,  however,  which  the  law  expressly  assigns  to 
this  prohibition  is  general;  by  taking  away  from  the  poor  debtor 
these  utensils,  so  essential  for  daily  domestic  use,  you  are 
depriving  his  family  of  the  means  ol  preparing  their  food.  Hence 
the  Rabbis  feel  justified  in  generalizing  this  law,  so  that  ''Every- 
thing which  is  used  for  preparing  food  is  forbidden  to  be  taken 
as  pledge."'  In  a  similar  way  the  special  law:  "Thou  shalt 
not  plow  with  an  ox  and  an  ass  together"  (Deut.  xxii,  10)  is 
generalized  by  the  Rabbis  so  as  to  equally  prohibit  the  yoking 
together  of  any  two  other  animals  of  different  species  and 
strength.  Ox  and  ass  are  here  mentioned  especially  as  being 
those  animals  ordinarily  employed  in  agriculture.  And  not 
only  in  plowing,  but  also  for  any  other  purpose  it  is  prohibited 
to  yoke  such  different  animals  together.^  From  the  quite  ra- 
tional principle  just  illustrated,  developed  the  Rabbinical  rule  of 


'Quando    lex  specialis,  ratio  autem  generalis,  generaliter  lex  est 
intelligenda. 

i)nin.  Mishna  B.   Metzia  ix,  13. 

*See  Siphre  P.  131;   compare  also  Mishna  Khilayim  viii,  2. 


The  Generalization  of  special  Laws.  ISY 

generalizing  special  laws.  According  to  the  theory  of  this  rule  it 
is  not  even  necessary  to  investigate  whether  the  reason  of  a 
certain  law  is  general  or  not,  but  any  special  law  found  in  the 
Mosaic  legislation  is  assumed  to  be  applicable  to  all  similar  or 
analogous  cases.  Only  where  Scripture,  in  some  of  those  ways 
which  arc  delined  by  the  Rabbis,  indicates  that  the  law  in  ques- 
tion is  provided  exclusively  for  the  particular  case  mentioned 
therein,  it  is  not  applicable  to  similar  cases.  But  otherwise, 
the  provisions  of  the  law  are  to  be  taken  in  a  comprehensive 
and  general  sense,  and  the  particular  case  expressly  mentioned 
is  to  be  regarded  only  as  an  illustrative  example  for  its  ap- 
plication.^ 

This  theory  is  termed  Binyan  Ab    (3S  |''33),    the   construc- 
tion of  a  leading  rule  i.  e.  the  Generalization  of  a  special  law,"" 

II.  Method  of  generalizing  a  law. 
§  35. 

In  Generalizing  a  special  law  so  as  to  make  it  applicable 
to  other  cases,  the  Rabbis  apply  the  following  method: 

They  try  to  point  out  in  the  special  case  some  character- 
istic peculiarities  which  taken  together  are  the  probable  reason 
for  the  provision  made  by  the  law  for  this  case.  Any  other  case 
having  the  same  peculiarities  is  regarded  as  an  analogous  case, 
subject  to  the  same  provision  of  the  law. 

The  formula  of  this  method  is  usually: 

^A  somewhat  similar  view  is  expressed  by  a  modern  law  - wi-iter , 
the  celebrated  Frenchman  Toullier  in  his  Le  Droit  Civil  Francais 
snivant  Vordre  du  Code,  liv  3.  t.  I.  c.  1.  "It  is  analogy  which  induces 
us,  with  reason,  to  suppose  that,  following  the  example  of  the  Cre- 
ator of  the  Universe,  the  lawgiver  has  established  general  and  u- 
niformlavs,  which  it  is  unnecessarv    to  repeat  in  all   analogous  cases." 

"  In  the  application  of  this  theory  sometimes  the  phrase  is  used: 
DN  nn  nr  "this  (special  case)  establishes  the  general  rule  or  law",  f . 
ex.  Sanhederin  30a;  B.  Kamma  77b.  Sota  2b.  In  this  phrase,  the  word 
3S  me-dnin^  father,  chief ,  ruler  is  taken  in  the  sense  of  principal  or 
general  rule  (compare  the  terms  mDS^On"iDNV  l^pn^nUS).  Hence  ::«  nJ3 
to  bnild  or  construct  a  general  rule,  and  DN  pja  the  construction  of  a 
general  rule,  the  generalization    of  a  special  law. 


158  Hermeneutics  of  the  Talmud. 

'^As  A  (the  case  mentioned  in  the  law)  being  characterized 
by  (that  and  that  certain  peculiarity)  is  subject  here  to  a  cer- 
tain provision,  so  any  case  similar  to  it  (by  having  the  same 
pecularities),  is  subject  to  the  same  provision. 

Where  it  is  to  be  shown  why  the  generalized  law  does  not 
apply  to  a  certain  not  quite  analogous  case,   the    formula    is: 

. ..«::''  ...b^  rj.s  ...C'ii^f)  n3i)  n:: 

''As  A  (having  those  certain  peculiarities)  is  here  subject 
to  that  provision,  so  any  other  case  (similar  to  it  by  having 
the  same  peculiarities).  The  case  of  B  however  is  excepted 
from  that  provision,  because  of  its  not  having  the  same 
peculiarities." 

Illustrations. 
§   36. 

a.  In  Leviticus  chapter  xi  and  Deut.  chap,  xiv,  the  law 
treats  of  clean  and  unclean  animal  food.  Concerning  the  quad 
rupeds,  fishes  and  flying  insects,  general  rules  are  given 
pointing  out  certain  criteria  by  which  to  distinguish  between 
the  clean  and  the  unclean.  For  the  distinction  between  clean  and 
unclean  fowls,  however,  no  general  rule  is  given,  but  there  is 
merely  a  list  of  nineteen  or  twenty  specified  birds  which 
are  unclean.  To  have  a  general  rule  also  for  this  kind 
of  animals  was  the  more  necessary  as  many  of  the  spe- 
cified fowls  can  not  easily  be  identified.  The  Rabbis  therefore 
tried  to  find  such  a  rule  by  generalizing  the  eagle  which 
stands  at  the  head  of  the  specified  list  of  unclean  fowls.  The 
eagle,  they  say,  has  four  peculiarities:  1.  it  has  not  a  ''pro- 
longed toe";  2.  it  has  no  crop;  3.  the  inner  coat  of  its  giz- 
zard cannot  easily  be  peeled  ofi  from  the  fleshy  part:  4,  it 
"strikes"  with  its  claws  the  prey  in  eating  it.  Hence  any 
fowl  resembling  it  in  these  peculiarities,  is  to  be  regarded  as 
unclean.^ 

d.     In  Deut.    ch   xix,  the  law  contains   some   particulars 
supplementary  to  a  former  law  concerning  the  cities   of  refuge 

^3iKi  Dini  p)Sp3  i33pi^p  pNi  pen  m^n^  ynv«  )b  ^^<^  ^nvD  itr:  no* 

Talmud  Chullin  61a.   ^<DLD  U  fc^VVD  P3  PIN  NDD 


The  Generalization  of  special  Laws.  159 

which  were  designed  to  serve  partly  as  a  protection,  partly 
as  a  punishment  and  atonement  for  him  who  unintentionally 
had  committed  a  homicide.  In  this  connection  the  special 
provision  is  made,  that  when  a  man  goes  into  a  forest  with  his 
neighbor  to  hew  wood,  and  the  iron  of  the  axe  slips  out  from 
the  handle  and  accidentally  kills  the  neighbor,  the  slayer  shall 
flee  into  one  of  those  cities. 

This  special  provision  is,  of  course,  generalized  by  the  Rab- 
bis, so  as  to  be  applicable  to  analogous  cases,  e.  g.  if  one  in 
breaking  down  a  wall  kills  a  man  accidentally  by  one  of  its 
falling  stones.  If,  however,  such  an  accident  happened  in 
private  premises,  where  the  man  who  was  killed  had  no 
right  to  enter,  he  who  unintentionally  caused  his  death  is  en- 
tirely acquitted,  without  having  to  flee  to  the  city  of  refuge; 
for  '•  'as  the  forest  mentioned  in  the  law  is  a  public  place  which 
the  slayer  and  the  slain  man  equally  had  a  right  to  enter,  so 
that  (aw  applies  only  to  accidents  occurring  on  places  which 
both  of  them  were  permitted  to  enter,  but  not  in  private 
premises,  where  the  man  who  was  killed  was  neither  permitted 
nor  expected  to  be."* 

Remark.  Where  it  is  not  intended  to  raise  a  special  provision  to  a 
general  law  applicable  to  all  similar  cases,  but  merely  to  draw  from 
it  an  analogy  for  one  single  similar  case,  there  the  method  is  termed 
irVD  no  (abbrev.  D"D),  from  the  phrase  by  which  such  an  analogy  is 
usually  introduced;  .  .  .  '1J''VD  no  "as  we  find  concerning  ...  so  here"; 
e.  g.    Yebamoth   7b:   ns  Jlt^^XD  D"0  Nedarim  4b:  Dm  JO  0"D. 

Incorrectly  the  0"D  is  sometimes  termed  3X  TJD,  as  in  Menuchoth 
76a;  y'riD  ^n^^riD  ^'^1\   see  Rashi  's  commentary  on  that  passage. 

III.  Generalization  of  two  special  provisions. 
§  37. 

In  the  instances  of  Binyan  Ab  mentioned  above,  the 
general  law  is  drawn  merely  from  one  special  provision.  Such 
l^eneralization  is  qualified  as  inS  2'in::D  2S  JM^  ''a  general 
law  drawn  from  one  passage  (or  provision)."  But  sometimes 
it  IS  formed  by  a  combination  of  two  special  provisions  found 
either  in  one  and  the  same  passage  or  in  two  different  passages 
ofScnpture.  In  this  case  it   is  termed  D^aLID   ''rJO    S"3    "a 


»    Mishna  Maccoth  II,  3.   ciJ^  nC'S    DJ3^^  p''Tttbl   pT^jS  n^L*n  -|j;'n  Tp 

DJ2^      h  msn  )^\m  nun  ^yn-ivn  k^^  xi^^  d:3^!?  P^d^ji  \>V'h  nll^n  b 


160  Hermeneutics  of  the  Talmud. 

general  rule  drawn  from  two  provisions'"  It  makes  no  es- 
sential difference  whether  the  two  provisions  are  found  in  the 
same  or  in  different  passages,  as  the  same  method  is  applied 
in  either  case. 

The  method  of  generalizing  two  special  provisions,  so  as 
to  make  of  them  one  general  law,  is  indicated  by  the  formula 
always  used  for  this  purpose.     It  is: 

nr  ''-in:)  nt  •'nn  «^i  nr  ••nnD  nt  nn  ^h 

' 'Behold,  this  case  is  not  like  the  other,  and  the  other  not 
like  this;  the  common  peculiarity  is...."  That  is  to  say,first  a  dif- 
ference between  the  two  special  provisions  is  stated,  and  then 
again  those  points  are  set  forth  which  are  common  to  both 
of  them,  and  which  form  their  characteristic  peculiarity.  Any 
other  case  having  the  same  peculiarity  is  then  subject  to  the 
same  law. 

Remark.  The  reason  why  a  difference  of  the  two  special  provisions 
has  first  to  be  demonstrated  before  generalizing  them,  is  explained  in 
the  following  way: 

It  is  a  Talmudic  rule  of  interpretation  that  inXD  D^X3n  D''ninD  ^:C 
incbtD  pi<  "wherever  two  provisions  of  the  law  are  found  in  Scripture 
which  are  so  identical  that  one  of  them  is  seemingly  superfluous,  as 
it  might  as  well  have  been  derived  from  the  other  by  way  of  an  ana- 
logy, then  no  further  deduction  from  either  of  them  can  be  admitted" 
(Kiddushin  24a  and  elsewhere).  In  making  a  Binyan  Ab  by  a  combina- 
tion of  two  special  provsions  it  is  therefore  necessary  first  to  show  that 
they  are  not  so  identical  as  to  be  regarded  as^nxa  D''N3n  DUIDD  '«iK^,but 
that  they  really  do  differ  in  some  points. 


^  This  definition  is  according  to  the  opinion  of  R.  Abraham  b. 
David  (Rabed)  in  his  exposition  of  the  hermeneutic  rules.  Some  com- 
mentators, however,  call  the  generalization  of  one  special  provision  of 
a  law  :  irVO  HO  ;  the  generalization  of  two  provisions  if  found  in  one 
passage:  "^^^^  DIJIDO  N"3f  and  if  found  in  two  different  passages  of 
Scripture:  D^3in3  ""JtrO  N"3. 


The  Generalization  of  Special  Laws.  161 

Illustration  of  generalizing  two  special  provisions. 

§38. 

In  Exodus  XXI,  26  and  27,  the  law  provides,  that  "if  a 
man  smite  the  eye  of  his  servant  and  destroy  it,  he  shall  let  him 
go  free  for  his  eye's  sake.  And  if  he  smite  out  his  servant's 
toothy  he  shall  let  him  go  free  for  his  tooth's  sake." 

Here  two  provisions  are  made,  one  concerning  the  eye  and 
one  concerning  the  tooth  of  the  servant.  Though  different  in 
their  nature,  eye  and  tooth  have  that  in  common  that  they  are 
essential  parts  of  the  human  body  and  the  loss  of  them  cannot 
be  restored.  Hence  the  Rabbis  draw  from  these  two  provisions 
the  general  law  that  the  mutilation  of  any  member  of  the  ser- 
vant's body  in  consequence  of  brutal  treatment  on  the  part  of  the 
master,  causes  the  immediate  manumission  of  that  slave.  ^ 

IV.  Generalizing  several  special  provisions. 
§39. 

There  are  some  instances  where  a  Bitiyan  Ab  is  formed  by 
a  combination  of  three  or  even  four  different  special  provisions. 
The  method  of  operation  in  such  cases  is  just  the  same  as  in  the 
case  of  generalizing  two  provisions. 

An  example  of  a  combination  of  four  different  provisions 
for  the  purpose  of  forming  one  general  rule  is  furnished  in  the 
first  Mishna  of  Baba  Kamma.  There,  reference  is  made  to 
four  principal  damages  provided  for  in  the  law:  1)  the  damage 
caused  by  2,  goring  beast  (Exod.  XXI,  28.  35.  36.);  2)  the  dam- 
age caused  by  an  uncovered  ///  (Exod.  XXI,  33.  34.)  3)  the 
damage  caused  by  depasturing  foreign  fields  (Exod.  xxii.  4)  and 
4)  damage  caused  by  unguarded  fire  (ibid,  verse  5.). 

Of  these  four  provisions  the  general  law  is  formed  that  a 
man  is  responsible  and  has  to  make  restitution  for  any  damage 


-innb  p^n^  p«K'  DnnN  ^tj^.o  Sd  f|x  -nrnb  p^^D^  v^^y  d'">3x  ^tj'xn 

Mechilta  Mishpatim  P.  ix;  cf.  also  Talmud  Kidd.  24a. 


162  Hermeneutics  of  the  Talmud. 

caused  by  his  neglect  to  guard  that  property  which  is  under 
his  care  and  liable  to  do  damage.  ^ 

Y.    Recapitulation. 

§40. 

Briefly  recapitulating  this  whole  chapter  on  Generaliza 
tion,we  shall  find  that  according  to  the  Talmudical  view  every 
provision  of  the  Mosaic  law  is,  as  far  as  possible,  to  be  taken 
as  a  general  law,  applicable  to  all  analogous  cases.  A  plain 
application  of  a  special  provision  to  one  analogous  case  is  termed 
IJ^'^D  (ID.  The  generalization  of  special  provisions,  so  as  to 
make  them  applicable  to  all  analogous  cases  is  termed  :3s  j^j^ 
the  construction  of  a  general  rule.  If  such  a  general  rule  is 
derived  merely  from  one  special  provision,  it  is  termed  ::t<  '■^^z 
irii^  21H2D.  A  general  rule  formed  by  a  combination  of  two 
(or  more)  special  provisions  which,  though  difierent,  have  some 
characteristic  points  in  common,  is  termed  D''2inD  ''it^'D  3S*  J^J2. 
These  common  characteristics  are  termed  nXTI  T^'H. 


i^'^  nn  nr  s*^i  "iit^n  nn^  nyn^  nn  ^pi  nvit^n  nn^  "iiK^n  nn  n?  ' 
nun  nnzi  p^rn^i  i^j^b  p~i"is^  nr^  n?  i6^  D^n  nn  n  pxtj>  s^♦^<n  nn^  D^^n  nn  |na 
yb'j  ;ni^rD-jn  p'^nb  ^^^-^^'^  inic'  niK>n  nvn  p^inbi  i-?^^  u-n  p&«^ 

Examples  of  Binyan  Ab  formed  of  three  provisions  are  foiind  in 
Sanhedrin  66a;  Maccoth  4b;  ChuUin  65b. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  GENERAL  AND  THE  PARTICULAR. 

Introductory. 
§41. 

In  order  to  understand  the  different  hermeneutic  rules  un- 
der this  heading,  it  is  necessary  to  have  a  clear  conception  of 
the  meaning  of  the  two  talmudical  terms  tD^D  and  hb^- 

^^D  means  the  General^  that  which  comprehends  a  class  of 
objects;  that  which  is  applicable  to  a  number  of  things  agree- 
ing in  a  certain  point  in  common. 

tD"i2  means  the  Particular  or  the  Special,  that  which  sin- 
gles out  an  individual  from  among  a  number  or  class. 

Hence,  any  general  term  or  any  noun  with  the  adjective 
^2  ^'all"  "whatsoever",  is  regarded  as  ^^D;  while  any  term  de- 
noting only  a  single  object  is  taken  as  tD"\2. 

The  law  usually  speaks  either  in  general  or  in  particular 
terms,  as:  ''He  that  smiteth  a  man^  so  that  he  die,  shall  be 
put  to  death"  (Ex.  XXI,  12);  "Thou  shalt  not  eat  any  abominable 
thing''  (Deut.  XIV,  3).  In  these  two  cases  the  terms  are  gener- 
al. But  in  the  law:  "Thou  shalt  not  seethe  the  kid  in  its  ?nother's 
77iiW    (Ex.  XXIII,  19),  the  terms  are  particular,  i 

It  is  obvious  that  where  the  law  speaks  in  general  terms 
it  intends  to  refer  to  everything  included  in  those  terms. 
Where,  however,  it  uses  particular  terms,  the  whole  tenor  of 
the  law  will  decide  whether  it  refers  exclusively  to  the  single 
objects  mentioned  and  enumerated  or  also  to  others  of  a  simi- 
lar nature. 

But  it  sometimes  occurs  that  the  law  uses  both  kinds  of 
terms  together,  so  that  either  1)  the  general   is  succeeded  by 


*The  terms  ^^D  and  t^is  are  applied  by  the  Rabbis  even  to  verbs.  A 
verb  denoting;  an  indefinite  act,  as  to  do,  to  take,  is  regarded  as  ■  p/Di 
while  a  verb  denoting  a  special  kind  of  act.  as  to  hake,  is  a  1015;  p-  g- 
Kiddushin  2ib.  t't'DTinpi?!;  Menachoth  55b:  LD"lD"n2i<n  \ih>  h72'TWVT\  N^). 


164  Hermeneutics  of  the  Talmud. 

particulars,  t^lSl  ^^D,  or  2)  the  particulars  are  succeeded  by  a 
general,  hb^^  t:)n£,or  3)  one  general  term  preceding  and  another 
succeeding  the  particulars,  ^^m  isnSI  ^^i-  In  each  of  these  three 
cases  the  contents  of  either  the  general  or  that  of  the  particu- 
lars are  modified  in  some  way.  These  modifications  are  defined 
by  the  following  three  rules. 

Rule  IY.  General  and  Particular. 
§42. 

In  the  case  of  General  a?id  Particular,  the  general  includes 
Clothing  but  the  particular. 

That  is,  when  a  general  term  is  followed  by  an  enumer- 
ation of  particulars,  the  law  is  assumed  to  refer  exclusively  to 
the  enumerated  particulars.  The  particulars  are  then  not  re- 
garded as  a  mere  illustrating  example  of  the  preceding  general, 
but  an  indication  that  the  contents  of  the  latter  are  restricted 
solely  to  that  of  the  particulars. » 

The  following  examples  will  illustrate  the  application  of 
this  rule: 

a.  In  Levit  I,  2.  The  law  defines  the  off'erings  to  be 
brought  on  the  altar  by  the  following  words:  ^'you  shall  bring 
your  ofiering  of  the  beast  (nDH^H  p),  oi'O^Qherd  or  of  the 
flockj"  The  general  term  is  here  ''the  beast  {ir\r:>T\Z)  which 
otherwise  includes  any  kind  of  quadrupeds,  both  wild  and  tame 
(cf.  Deut.  XIV,  4.  5);  but  the  special  terms'V/^r^  and //^^/&"  limit 
the  ofiering  to  these  domesticated  animals.  The  law  is  then  to  be 
construed  in  the  following  way:  of  the  beast,  viz.  only  of  the  herd 
and  of  the  flock  you  shall  bring  your  ofl"ering.' 


'  Somewhat  analogous  to  this  Rabbinical  rule  of  interpretation  is 
the  following  rule  of  construction  of  modern  laws:  "Where  a  general 
enactment  is  followed  by  a  special  enactment  on  the  same  subject,  the 
latter  enactment  overrides  and  controls  the  earlier  one".  See  Broom's 
Legal  Maxims  p.  650. 

'  n^n  ^\  1^  ^mON  |K^  "Ipn.  Tal.  Zebachim  34a. 


The  General  and  the  Particular.  1© 

b.  In  Deut.  XXII,  11  the  law  reads:  '^Thou  shalt  not 
wear  a  w/«:^/(f^  stuff  (Trjj;*^),  wool  and  linen  together".  Here 
the  general  terra  TyL^j;^',  meaning  a  mixture  of  different  sorts, 
is  followed  by  the  particulars  ''wool  and  linen  together;"  hence 
the  Rabbis  regard  the  prohibition  of  wearing  a  garment  of  ming- 
led stuff  to  be  restricted  to  a  mixture  of  wool  and  linen.* 

c.  In  Levit.  XyiII,6  sq.  the  law  on  prohibited  marriages 
begins  with  the  general  terms:  "None  of  you  shall  approach 
to  any  that  is  near  of  kin  to  him — ".  According  to  this  general 
interdiction  the  intermarriage  with  any  degree  of  relationship 
would  be  prohibited.  But  as  the  general  is  followed  by  a  spe- 
cification of  prohibited  degrees,  the  interdiction  is  to  be  re- 
stricted to  these  specified  degrees. ' 

Rule  Y.     Particulars  and  General. 
§  43. 

33n  jranDi  tonsn  bv  ci'^did  ^^dh  n^]::  ^^di  d-is 

In  the  case  of  Partieulars  afid  General,  the  general  term 
adds  to  the  contejits  of  the  particulars^  and  we  include  everything  {be- 
longing to  this  general'). 

That  is  to  say,  where  particular  terms  are  followed  by  a 
general  term,  it  is  assumed  that  the  law  refers  to  anything  in- 
cluded in  the  general,^  the  particulars  being  regarded  merely 
as  illustrative  examples  of  that  general. 


1  See  Mishna  Khilayim  X,  1,  and  the  commentary  of  Obadiah 
Bertinoro. 

•  Siphra  in  loco:  ^'^AV\  n*^3  iXt^  S^  5?X  I'^^X  ^^^ 

D-iD— '1J1  -|DX  mij;T  -i^ns  nny 

D"lDn*^  HD  xSx  ^^33  TNI  13-121  Sb 
It  is  true,  the  rabbinical  law  adds  some  extenpi(ms  to  the  biblical  list 
of  prohibited  degrees,  but  these  extensions  are  not  regarded  as  biblical, 
but  as  nVJ&J'  'secondary  prohibitions'  made  by  the  authority  of  the 
Sopherim.  See  Mielziner  'The  Jewish  Law  of  Marriage  and  Divorce', 
p.  37. 

•  In  a  somewhat  similar  case,  the  modern  rules  of  construction 
take  just  the  opposite  v'ew,  a-  may  be  seen  from  the  following  quota- 
tion in  Broom's  Legal  Maxims  p.  C50  :  'It  is  said  to  be  a  good  rule  of 


166  Hermeneutics  of  the  Talmud. 

This  rule  is  applied  in  the  following  la^vin  Exodus  XXII,9: 
''If  a  raan  delivereth  to  his  neighbor  an  ass,  or  an  ox, or  a 
sheep,  or  any  beast  to  keep,  and  it  die,  etc. " 

Here  the  enumerated  particular  terms  ass,  ox,  sheep  are 
followed  by  the  general  term  ^^a?iy  beasf\  Hence  this  law  re- 
fers to  any  kind  of  animal  which  is  delivered  to  be  guarded.* 

Rule  VI.     General,  Particular  and  General. 

§  44. 

A  case  of  one  general  preceding  and  another  following  the 
particular  can,  in  some  respects,  be  regarded  as  an  combina- 
tion oftlie  two  former  cases,  namely  of  General  and  Particular 
and  of  Particular  and  General,  and  the  rule  for  this  combina- 
tion is,  consequently,  a  kind  of  amalgamation  of  the  two  rules 
given  above  concerning  these  tvro  cases.  While  in  the  case  of 
General  and  Particular  (Rule  lY)  the  general  includes  nothing 
but  the  strict  contents  oftlie  particular,  and  in  the  case  of  Par- 
ticular and  General  (Rule  Y)  the  contents  of  the  particular  are 
extended  to  the  whole  comprehension  of  the  general,  it  is  held 
that  a  particular  between  two  general  terms  is  to  be  extended 
only  as  far  as  to  include  that  which  is  similar  to  the  contents  of 
this  particular,  or  as  the  rule  is  expressed  in  the  talmudic  phra- 
seology: 

construction  thafwhere  anAct  of  Parliament  begins  with  words  which 
describe  things  or  persons  of  an  inferior  degree  and  concludes  with 
general  words,  the  general  words  shall  not  be  extended  to  any  thing 
or  person  of  a  higlier  degree'',  that  is  to  say,  where  a  particular  class 
[of  persons  or  things]  is  spoken  of,  and  general  words  follow,  the 
class  first  mentioned  is  to  be  taken  as  the  most  comprehensive,  and  the 
general  words  treated  as  referring  to  matters  ejusdem  generis  with 
such  class,  the  effect  of  general  words  when  they  follow  particular 
words  being  thus  restricted'. 

1  Mechilta  on  this  passage  : 

n*^  IX  "Ti?on  IX  -iii^  x!?x  h  px 

T:cr.z  ^y\  y'n  '<  x^o  hdhd  i?D  iX25' 


The  General  and  the  PARTrcuLAR.  167 

In  a  case  of  General,  rarticular  and  General,  do  include  only 
ihaiivhich  resembles  the pariictdar. 

An  example  illustrating  the  application  of  this  rule  is  fur- 
nished in  Ex.  XXII,  8,  where  the  law  is  laid  down  that  in  all 
cases  when  a  person  has  been  found  guilty  of  having  embezzl- 
ed property,  that  person  shall  pay  the  double  amount  of  the  em- 
bezzlement. This  law  is  introduced  by  the  words:  'Tor  any  mat- 
ter of  trespass  (General),  for  ox,  for  ass,  for  sheep,  for  raiment 
(Particulars),  for  anything  lost  (General)...  he  shall  pay  double 
to  his  neighbor." 

Applying  the  rule  of  General,  Particular  and  General,  the 
Rabbinical  interpretation  of  this  law  is  to  the  etfect  that  the 
restitution  of  the  twofold  value  is  to  be  made  only  for  such  em 
bezzled  property  which  resembles  the  particular  (the  specified 
objects:  ox,  ass,  sheep,  raiment)  in  this  that  it  is  movable  pro- 
perty, and  that  it  is  an  object  of  inirifisic  value.  Hence  the  fine 
of  double  payment  for  the  embezzled  property  does  not  apply 
where  it  concerns  real  estate  which  is  not  movable,  and  neither 
where  it  concerns  bills  or  notes  which  have  no  intrinsic  but 
only  a  representative  value.  ^ 

Remark  1.  In  regard  to  the  limitation  of  ''that  which  res- 
embles the  particulars^'  (t:-,5n  \^^'2\  the  Talmud  expresses  two 
opinions  which  differ  from  each  other  slightly. 

According  to  one  opinion  it  is  assumed  that  in  a  connection 
of  General,  Particular  and  General  '^'^r\  )^nif  )^hh'^  ''the  first 
general  is  prevailing  and  deciding,"  so  that  such  a  connection 
is  to  be  treated  mainly  in  accordance  with  the  rule  fort:ns:i  hh":^ 
viz.  that  the  general  comprises  nothing  but  the  strict  contents 
of  the  particular.  These  contents  are,  however,  in  our  case 
modified  by  the  succeeding  general,  so  that  it  now  comprises 

»  Baba  Kamma  G2  b:  !^b  -    I.'L"2    im    ^D  ^V 

LD-iD  —  r\rh^  ^yi  nK>  ^y  niton  y^  "iic  ^y 

jitDO  iQi:i  bob*L:?:n  im  ?d  ^ix 

pStibn»D  |ri<i*'  mvp-ip  inv^ 

ptD?D  |Qia  r«  r^obtoroe^  Dn'^<::^  miner  isv^ 

Other  examples  are  furnished  in  Nazir  35  b ;  Shebuoth  4  b  ;  43  a. 


168  Hermeneutics  of  the  Talmud, 

anything  which  resembles    the  particular,  at  least,  in  three 

points  (jm:!;  n':;b*^2). 

But  the  other  opinion  assumes  that  in  a  connection  of  Gi- 
neral,  Particular  and  General  Spn  \^^^\Z  fc<^^3  ''the  last  gener- 
al is  prevailing  and  deciding".  Hence,  such  a  connection  is  to 
be  treated  rather  in  accordance  with  the  rule  for  ^^di  t^ns,  so 
that  the  contents  of  the  particular  are  extended  to  everything 
comprised  in  the  general.  This  extension  is,  however,  in  our 
case  modified  by  the  first  general  in  as  tar  as  it  excludes  that 
which  resembles  the  particular  only  in  one  point  (Tnj^  !:»), 
while  anything  resembling  it  in  more  than  one  point  i^y^-^ 
jn"'^)  is  included.  See  Talm.  Erubin  28a;  compare  also  Rashi 
on  Chullm  65b  sub  voce  n"^"!. 

Remark  2.  Two  general  terms  either  preceded  or  followed  by  a 
particular  are,  according  to  some  authorithies,  also  treated  as  a  case 
of  General,  Particular  and  General : 

^bi  D-ID1  bba  pni  |n^:u  did  ^dh 

Chullin  66  b  ;  B.   Kamma  64  b. 
Remark  3.  The  rule  of  General  and  Particular  applies  only  when 
both  are  found  in  one  and  the  same  passage  of  the  law,    but  not 
when  in  different  passages  : 

B.  Kamma  85  a ;  Menaohoth  55  b. 


CHAPTER  V. 

MODIFICATIONS  OF  THE  RULES  OF  GENERAL 

AND  PARTICULAR. 
The  Rules  YII-XI  contain   five   diflferent  modifications  of 
the  preceding  rules  concerning  the  General  and  Particular. 
First  Modification.   Rule  VII. 
§  45 

^^D^  'T'n::  sintr  tonsi  tans'?  ^n^  sintr  bb:^ 

There  is  a  general  that  requires  the  Particular,  and  a  Particu- 
lar that  requires  the  General, 

That  is  to  say,  the  preceding  rules  of  General  and  Particu- 
lar do  not  apply  to  cases  where  either  the  general  needs  the 
supplement  of  the  particular,  or  where  the  particular  necessari- 
ly  requires  the  supplement  of  the  general  in  order  to  express 
a  full  and  clear  meaning.  For,  an  ambiguous  general  term 
cannot  be  treated  as  a  general;  neither  can  an  indefinite  special 
term  be  regarded  as  a  particular. 

Thus,  in  Lenticus  XVII,  13  the  law  enjoins  that  he  who 
taketh  in  hunting  any  beast  or  fowl  that  may  be  eaten,  Hhall 
pour  out  the  blood  thereof  nsy^  inDDI  ''and  cover  it  with  dust'\ 

In  this  passage  the  word  inDDI  might  have  been  taken 
as  a  general  expression,  since  there  are  various  ways  of  cover- 
ing a  thing;  nsy^  again  is  a  particular  term,  and  according  to 
the  rule  of  Klal  u-Phrat  (Rule  IV)  the  interpretation  of  this 
law  would  be,  that  the  blood  must  be  covered  with  dust  and 
with  nothing  else. 

But  the  general  expression  HDD  is  ambiguous,  as  it  admits 
of  difibrent  meanings;  it  means  as  well  to  cover  (i.  e.  to  overlay, 
to  envelop),  as  also  to  hide  (to  conceal,  to  withdraw  from  the 
sight).  Without  the  addition  of  nsyn  we  might  suppose  that 
the  law  only  intended  to  enjoin  that  such  blood  oe  put  out^  of 
Bight  or  concealed  in  a  closed  vessel.     Hence  the  expression ; 


170  Hermeneutics  OF  THE  Talmud. 

^nO^^  is  ^'a  General  that  requires  the  Particular",  to  express 
that  the  meaning  is  to  overlay  it  with  something. 

Consequently  the  rule  of  K'lal  u-Phrat  cannot  be  applied 
here,  and  the  term  nsy^  is  not  necessarily  to  be  taken  in  its 
strictest  sense,  but  may  be  extended  so  as  to  include  anything 
resembling  the  dust.' 

The  same  passage  can  also  serve  to  illustrate  the  second 
part  of  our  rule.  The  special  term  nSJj;^  without  the  general 
expression  iriD^l  would  have  been  quite  meaningless,  as  no 
verb  would  be  there  indicating  what  to  do  with  the  dust. 
Hence  it  is  '^a  Particular  that  requires  the  supplement  of  the 
General".  Another,  somewhat  intricate,  example  in  Talmud 
Bechoroth  19a. 

Second  Modification.  Pule  YIII. 
§46. 

iM  ^bn  p  s:;"'!  ^^D2  n^n^  -i:n  b 

When  a  single  case,  though  already  i?icluded  in  a  general  law, 
is  expressly  mentioned^  then  the  provision  connected  with  it^  applies 
to  all  other  cases  included  in  that  general  law. 

This  rule  is  illustrated  by  the  two  following  cases: 
a.  The  practice  of  witchcraft  was  according  to  the  gener- 
al law  in  Ex.  XXII,  IT  (rT'nn  S^  nStr^D)  a  capital  crime. 
The  nature  of  the  capital  punishment  is,  however,  not  defined 
in  this  general  law.  But  in  regard  to  a  certain  kind  of  witch- 
craft, namely  ^T\'^^'^\  31S  (having  a  familiar  spirit  and  being  a 
wizard)  the  law  specifies  the  punishment  as  that  of  stoning 
(Lev.  XX,  27).  Hence  this  punishment  applies  to  the  practice 
of  any  kind  of  witchcraft'. 


»Tal.   Chullin  88b:  t^ne  ICy  ^hl^  inODI  ND'^« 

?  N^  KjnnN*  n^o  rx  "icy 

.tDiDi  fen  imx  rn  pxi 

"Talm.   Sanhederin  67b!  VH  Ct^K^DO  fen  ^Jiyn^l  niK 

^  'y\:>h'\  dh^Sn  ^^"^rh  ?  ^nv'  no^i 


Modifications.  ITl 

b.  Deut.  XXII  1-3,  the  law  treats  of  tlie  duty  to  restore 
found  property  to  its  owner.  After  having  enjoined  this  duty 
concerning  animals  found  going  astray,  it  is  added:  ''And  so 
Shalt  thou  do  with  his  garment)  and  so  shalt  thou  do  with  every 
lost  thing  of  thy  brother's,  which  he  hath  lost,  and  thou  hast 
found..."In  interpreting  this  law  the  Eabbissay.Why  \^garment 
expressly  mentioned,  though  contained  in  the  general  term  of 
''every  lost  thing"?  It  is  to  indicate  of  what  nature  the  found 
things  must  be  concerning  which  it  is  your  duty  to  advertise 
in  order  to  restore  them  to  their  owner.  Every  garment  had 
certainly  an  owner  and,  besides,  it  has  some  marks  by  which 
he  could  identify  it.  So  the  duty  of  advertising  tound  things 
refers  only  to  such  property  which  obviously  had  an  owner  who 
will  reclaim  it  and  which  has  certain  marks  by  which  he  might 
be  able  to  identify  it.' 

Third  Modification.    Rule  IX. 
§  47. 

irjy::  sinir  ins  jyitD  \y^'^h  «:f''i  ^^D3  hti::'  n^i  "^d 

Wherever  a  single  case,  though  already  included  in  a  general 
law^  is  expressly  mentioned  ivith  a  provision  si??iilar  to  the  general^ 
such  a  case  is  ??ientioned  for  the  purpose  of  alleviating,  but  not 
of  aggravating. 

An  example  is  furnished  in  Ex. XXXV, 3:  ''you  shall  kindle 
no  fire  throughout  your  habitations  on  the  Sabbath  day". 
Now  kindling  fire  being  regarded  as  a  labor,  is  included  in  the 
general  prohibition  of  doing  any  labor  on  the  Sabbath  day. 
Since  here  expressly  mentioned,  it  is  for  the  purpose  of  alle- 
viating this  special  case  by  exempting  it  from  the  rigor  ot  the 
general  law  in  regard  to  labor  on  the  Sabbath  day,  so  that  ha 

«Mishna  B.  Metzia  II,   5:  r\W  ^3  bpD3  nn^H     rh^^T]  nX 

D^ynin  n^  ^''\  d^jd^d  r\i  ^^^  mnvD  rh^^  no 

other  examples  are  furnished  in  Tal.  Yehamoth  7a,  and  Kheri- 
thoth  2b. 


IT2  Hermeneutics  of  the  Talmud. 

irho  kindles  fire  on  that  day,  transgresses  only  a  prohibitory 
law,  but  is  not  subject  to  that  severe  punishment  which  the 
preceding  verse  appoints  for  other  kinds  of  labor/ 

Fourth  Modification.  Rule  X, 

§  48. 

i:'':^  s^ty  nns  jj;itD  jiyta^  s:;*"!  ^^:33  n^'nt:^  nai  ^d 

.TDnn'?!  bpnb  «::•♦ 

Wherever  a  single  case,  though  included  in  a  general  laWy  is 
separately  mentioned  with  a  provision  differing  from  that  contained 
in  the  general,  such  a  case  is  mentioned  for  the  purpose  of  dUeviat- 
ing  as  well  as  of  aggravating. 

This  rule  may  be  illustrated  by  the  passage  in  Ex.  XXI, 
28-32.  There  the  law  provides  that  if  a  man  or  woman  ha3 
been  killed  by  a  beast  that  had  not  been  duly  guarded  by  the 
proprietor,  though  its  savage  nature  was  known  to  him,  that 
proprietor,  besides  losing  the  mischievous  animal,  had  to 
pay  (to  the  bereaved  family)  such  an  indemnification  as  may 
be  laid  upon  him  by  the  court.  After  this  general  provision 
the  law  adds  that  if  a  male  or  female  slave  was  killed  by  such 
a  vicious  animal,  its  proprietor  has  to  pay  to  the  master  of 
the  slave  an  indemnification  of  l/n'rty  shekels.  Now  the  case 
of  male  or  female  slave,  though  included  in  the  preceding  gen- 
eral law  of  man  and  woman,  is  here  separately  mentioned 
with  a  provision  different  from  the  general  in  this,  that  the 
amount  of  the  indemnification  is  fixed.  This  separate  provision 
is  for  the  purpose  of  alleviating  as  well  as  aggravating;  «//<?- 
mating  in  the  case  of  the  actual  value  of  the  killed  slave  being 


^Talm.  Sabbath  70a,    and  Saiihederin  35b:    rii^V'  1N^^    niy^H. 

There  is  however  another  opinion  represented  by  R.  Nathan  who, 
interpreting  this  special  prohibition  of  "kindling  fire"  according  to 
the  second  modifi.^ation  (Rule  VIII),  holds  :  riNV  pbnb  mvnn,  this 
special  prohibition  of  one  kind  of  labor  is  an  indication  that  each  of 
several  labors  done  on  a  Sabbath-day  is  to  be  regarded  as  a  separ- 
ate df^seoration  of  that  day,  for  which  the  transgrassor,  under 
circumstances,   had  to  bring   a  separate  sin  -  offering.  Talm.  ibid. 


Modifications.  1T3 

more,  and  aggravating  in  the  case  of  its  being  less  than  thirty 
shekels. 

See  Mechilta,  Mishpatim,  Parsha  XI  and  Mishna  B.  Kam- 
ma  IV,  5. 

Fifth  Modification.    Rule  XI. 
§49. 
trrnn  •^.213  \vh  hh^r\  p  sri  bh^2  n'^rvo  nai  h:^ 

Wherever  a  single  case,  though  included  in  a  general  law,  ts  ex- 
cepted from  it  by  an  entirely  new  provision^  such  a  case  is  not  to  be 
brought  again  under  the  general  law,  unless  this  be  expressly  indic- 
ated in  the  Scripture. 

An  illustrating  example  is  furnished  in  Lev.  XIY,  11-16. 
One  of  the  two  sacrifices  which  the  healed  leper  had  to  bring 
for  his  purification  was  a  trespass-offering  {W^^)-  But  while 
the  blood  of  trespass-ofi"erings  in  general  was  sprinkled  only 
on  the  altar,  the  ofi'ering  of  the  healed  leper  made  an  excep- 
tion in  this,  that  some  of  its  blood  was  applied  to  the  person 
of  him  that  was  to  be  cleansed  (verse  25).  This  peculiar  way 
of  sprinkling  is  tr inn  121  the  entirely  new  (extraordinary) 
provision  by  which  this  sacrifice  is  excepted  from  the  general 
law  of  trespass-ofierings.  Hence  it  would  have  to  be  excepted 
also  from  the  other  ordinances  and  rites  regarding  trespass-ofler- 
mgs,  had  not  the  Scripture  expressly  brought  it  again  under 
the  'general  law  by  adding  (verse  13  sin  D^Sn  n«tsn2)  that 
this  offering  was  otherwise  to  be  sacrificed  as  a  trespass-offer- 
ing in  the  usual  way.     Talm.  Zebachim  49a. 


CHAPTER  VI 

RULES  XII  AND  XIII. 

The  Explanation  from  the  Context.    Rule  XII. 
§  50. 

A  word  (or  passage)  is  to  be  explained  from  its  connection  or 
from  what  follows. 

That  i8  to  sajjthe  true  meaning  of  a  law  or  of  a  clause  in  a 
law  is  sometimes  to  be  interpreted  by  considering  the  whole 
context  in  which  it  stands  or  by  looking  to  that  which  folio ws.^ 

Examples: 

a.  Explaining  an  ambiguous  word  from  the  context: 
The  word  riDw'jn  occurs  in  Levit.  XI,  18,  among  the  names 

of  unclean  fowls,  and  again  in  verse  30  among  the  creeping 
things  on  earth.  Hence,  it  is  concluded,  that  the  law  does  not 
refer  to  the  same  animal,  but  in  the  former  place  to  a  certain 
kind  of  bird  (namely  according  to  LXX  the  swan^  and  accord- 
ing to  the  Talmud,  to  the  bat)^  and  in  the  other  place  to 
the  mole.'^ 

b.  Explaining  the  meaning  of  a  passage  from  the  context. 
In  Ex.  XYI,  29,  we  read:    ''Abide  you  every  man   in  his 

place,  let  no  man  go  out  of  his  place  on  the  seventh  day."  If 
taken  out  of  its  connection,  this  passage  would  contain  an  in- 
junction that  no  Israelite  shall  leave  his  place  on  the  Sabbath 
day.     But  if  w^e   look   to  the  context,  we  find  that  it  refers  to 


'Compare  the  following  rule  of  modern  jurisprudence  with  refer" 
ence  to  the  mode  of  construing  deeds  and  written  instruments  :  Ex 
antecedentibus  et  conaequentibus  fit  optima  interpretatio.  "A  passage 
will  be  best  interpreted  by  reference  to  that  wich  precedes  and  fol- 
lows it".  (Broom,  Legal  Maxims  577).  Compare  also  the  maxim:  Nos- 
citur  a  sociis  "The  meaning  of  a  clause  may  be  ascertained  by  ref- 
erence to  the  meaning  of    expressions  associated  with  it"  (ibi.    588). 

achuiiin  63a:  "i3i  ir^vo  i^^H  im  .n^Qivn^^  mX3  nD&^'Jn 


The  Explanation  from  the  Context.  175 

the  manna  gatherers,  prohil^iting  thc-m  to  go  out  on  the  Sab- 
bath day  with  the  intention  to  seek  manna. i 

c.  Interpreting  a  clause  in  a  law  by  a  clause  which  follows: 
In  Deut.  XIX,  5  relating  to  the  cities  of  refuge  for  the 
manslaycr,  the  law  says:  ''Lest  the  avenger  of  the  blood  pur- 
sue the  slayer  and  overtake  him  and  slay  him  ;  and  he  is  not 
worthy  of  death  etc."  This  last  clause  is  somewhat  ambiguous, 
whether  referring  to  the  blood  ave?tger  or  to  the  manslayer. 
The  latter  interpretation  is  supported  by  the  clause  following 
it:    '•Hn  as  7nuch  as  he  hated  hi?n  not  in  time past.'^^ 

Reconciliation  of  Conflicting  Passages.    Rule  XIII. 

§  51. 

nn^ira  r^^"'i  ''*^"^^tyn  ain^n  «3''tr  ^v 

Two  passages  contradicting  each  other  are^  if  possible,  to  be  re- 
conciled by  a  third  one.  ^ 

As  an  instance  of  contradictory  passages  we  may  refer  to 
Ex.  XIII,  6  and  Deut.  XVI,  8.  While  the  former  passage  en- 
joins: ^^ Seven  days  shalt  thou  eat  unleavened  bread,"  the  lat- 
ter passage  says:  ^'Six  days  thou  shalt  eat  unleavened  bread." 

In  a  plain  way,  the  contradiction  between  these  two  pas- 

iThis  plain  interpretation  according  to  the  context  is  also  adopt- 
ed by  Raslii  in  his  commentary  on  this  passage.  Talmudical 
interpretation,  however,  disregarded  in  this  case  the  context,  and 
deduced  from  the  words  of  this  passage  the  general  prohibition  that 
no  Israelite  shall,  on  a  Sabbath-day,  go  farther  than  2000  cubits 
from  the  place  of  his  abode  (nnc'  Dinn  "the  Sabbath  way");  for 
that  was  the  distance  of  the  holy  tabernacle  from  the  remotest 
'lart  of  the  Israelitish  camp  in  the  desert.   See  Talm.  Erubin  51a. 

''Maccoth  10b:  -131^   3iriDn  nvns    rHlO  tOSK^Q   pX  ifjl 

.-in"»?D  niriDH  nv"n3  i^^-x  ^in 

•  Compare  the  following  rule  of  interpretation  estabhshed  in 
modern  jurisprudence  (Potter,  Dwarris  treatise  on  statutes  p.  144)  : 
"Where  there  is  a  discrepancy  or  disagreeruent  between  two  statutes, 
such  interpretation  should  be  given  that  both  may,  if  possible,  stand 
together." 


176  Hermexeutics  of  the  Talmud. 

sages  may  be  removed  by  taking  the  latter  passage  in  the 
sense  that  six  days  unleavened  bread  shall  be  eaten,  but  that 
on  the  seventh,  besides  this  observance,  a  holy  convocation 
shall  be  held;  or,  that  unleavened  bread  shall  be  eaten  during 
six  days  besides  the  first,  the  celebration  of  which  had  been 
treated  more  fully  in  the  preceding  verses. 

In  a  more  artificial  way,  the  rabbinical  interpretation 
tries  to  reconcile  the  contradictory  passages  accor<ling  to  our 
Rule  by  referring  to  a  third  passage,  namely  Lev.  XXIII,  14 
where  the  law  enjoins  that  no  use  whatsoever  was  allowed  to 
be  made  of  the  new  corn  until  the  ofiering  of  an  Omer  of  the 
first  produce  of  the  barley  harvest  had  taken  place  on  the 
morning  after  the  first  day  of  Pesach.  Hence  unleavened 
bread  prepared  of  the  new  corn  was  to  be  eaten  only  during 
the  six  remaining  days  of  that  festival.  Referring  to  this  cir- 
cumstance, the  passage  in  Dent.  XYI,  8  speaks  of  six  days, 
while  the  passage  in  Ex  XIII,  6  refers  to  the  unleavened  bread 
prepared  of  the  produce  of  the  former  year's  harvest  which 
might  be  eaten  during  seven  days.^ 

Remark.  Some  of  the  Rabbis  however,  apply  in  their  interpret- 
ation of  Deut.  XVI,  8  the  Rule  VIII  and  arrive  at  the  conclusion 
thatjjust  as,  according  to  this  passage,  the  eating  of  unleavened  bread 
on  the  seventh  day  was  optional,  so  it  was  also  optional  on  the  first 
six  days,  so  that  it  was  not  obligatory  to  eat  just  that  which  is  prop- 
erly called  unleavened  bread  (Matza),  provided  that  nothing  is  eaten 
which  is  leavened  (Chametz).  Only  on  the  first  eve  of  this  festival 
the  eating  ot  such  unleavened  bread  was  regarded  as  obligatory,  as  the 
law  concerning  the  paschal-lamb  on  the  eve  expressly  enjoins  (Ex. 
XII,  8)  "with  unleavened  bread  and  with  bitter  herbs  they  shall  eat  it.'" 


»    Mechilta,  Bo,  VIII  (compare  also  Talmud  Menachoth  66a): 
•    Pesachim  130a:  rw^l  D^D^  HK'K^  P^S  niCT  T^K'  HD 


CHAPTER  VII. 

ADDITIONAL  RULES. 

A.     Juxtaposition. 

§  52. 

A  peculiar  kind  of  analogy  which  has  some  similarity  to 
Heckesh  (above  p.  152)  is  that  called  ]''D1DD  contiguous  passages^ 
or  the  analogy  made  from  the  juxtaposition  of  two  laws  in  Script- 
ure. 

The  theory  of  this  rule  is  that  the  meaning  of  a  law  is 
sometimes  explained  from  another  law  or  passage  which  is 
placed  near  by,  either  preceding  or  following  it.' 

The  following  examples  will  illustrate  this  rule: 

1.  The  word  Mamzer  (usually  translated  a  bastard)  in  the 
law  Deut.  XXIII,  3:  < 'A  Mamzer  shall  not  enter  the  congrega- 
tion of  the  Lord"  denotes,  according  to  rabbinical  interpreta- 
tion, one  born  of  incest  or  adultery.  This  interpretation  is 
based  on  the  circumstance  that  a  preceding  law  (ib.  verse  1.) 
interdicts  an  incestuous  conm^ction.^ 

2.  The  law  prohibits  every  labor  on  Sabbath,  without 
specifying  the  occupations  included  in  that  interdiction,  thus 
leaving  a  wide  scope  to  individual  opinion  on  the  nature  of 
Sabbatical  labor.  Tradition,  in  order  to  prevent  arbitrariness 
in  so  important  a  point,  tried  to  fill  out  this  void  by  a  detailed 
definition  of  the  nature  of  work,  and  minutely  specified  the 
labors  which  are  allowed  and  which  are  forbidden  on  Sabbath. 
The  Talmud  distinguishes  thirty  nine  chief  labors  m2^s^D  m2J</ 
comprising  all  those  occupations  which  were  necessary  for  the 


*    This  rule  was  prohaoly  introduced  by  R.  Akiba,   see  Siphre, 
Numbers  131:  '121  nslDDK^  HK^-lD  h'2  nOIK  V'T 

»    Yebamoth  49a. 

1IDD    NU^  nS  r\'h  "I^CDI 


Its  Hermeneutics  of  the  Talmud. 

construction  of  the  holy  tabernacle.  This  is  based  on  the  cir- 
cumstance that  Scripture  repeatedly  (Exod  XXXI  1-1 1; 
XXXY,  1  sq.)  brought  the  Sabbath  law  in  juxtaposition  with 
the  description  of  the  tabernacle.  ^ 

Remark.  The  theory  of  jOIDD  which  Ben  Azai,  one  of  R.  Akiba's 
disciples,  even  applied  in  the  construction  of  criminal  laws,  was  not 
generally  adopted.  R.  Jehuda  ben  Ilai,  another  disciple  of  R.  Akiba, 
is  especially  mentioned  as  having  been  opposed  to  its  general  application. 
He  strongly  objected  to  a  deduction  based  by  the  former  on  that  the- 
ory in  the  case  of  a  certain  capital  crime,  remarking  with  astonishment: 
"How,  shall  we  inflict  the  punishment  of  stoning  upon  a  criminal  be- 
cause two  laws  are  incidentally  in  juxtaposition?"  (Yebamoth  4a;  San- 
hedrin  67b.). 

He  admitted  the  analogy  from  juxtaposition  only  in  cer- 
tain cases,  especially  in  regard  to  laws  found  in  the  book  of  Deutemomy 
where  the  laws  are  evidently  arranged  according  to  a  certain  plan, 
while  in  regard  to  the  other  books  of  the  Pentateuch  it  is  held  :  ps 
minn  iniKDl  DTPID  "there  is  no  certain  order  for  the  sequence  of  the 
laws"  (Pesachim  6b), hence  no  analogy  must  there  be  based  on  the  jux- 
taposition of  two  laws    (Sanhedrin  ibid.). 

§  53. 

Another  kind  of  J^'^lDD  consists  in  the  method  of  sepa- 
rating the  final  part  of  a  clause  or  sentence  and  connecting  it 
with  the  beginning  of  the  following  clause  or  sentence,  and  in 
this  way  artificially  forming  a  new  sentence,  the  sense  of  which 
is  to  support  a  certain  traditional  law. 

This  peculiar  method  may  be  illustrated  by  the  following 
examples. 

1.  It  was  a  traditional  rule  of  law,  based  on  common 
sense,  that  a  judge  was  unfit  to  sit  in  court  when  known  to 
nourish  inimical  feelings  either  against  the  defendant  or  against 
one  of  his  fellow  judges.     In  the  absence  of  an  express  passage 


>  Talm.  Sabbath  49b:  ]:i^}2n  mMV  1i^^  niDX^D  nU«;  see  Rashi'i 
Commentary  on  this  passage.  Other  examples  of  this  kind  of  analogy 
are  found  in  Pesachim  96a;  Yebamoth  4a. 


Additional  Rules.  1T9 

in  the  Mosaic  law  bearing  on  this  rule,  the  Rabbis  construed 
an  artificial  support  in  the  following  way.    In  Numbers  XXXV, 

23,    in  the   law  about    unintentional  murder,    it   is  said 

' 'whereas  he  was  not  his  enemy,  and  did  not  seek  his  harm". 
These  words  plainly  refer  to  the  slayer  and  the  slain  man,  but 
by  connecting  them  with  the  beginning  of  the  following  sen 
tence  (verse  24):  '^he  congregation  (i.  e.  the  court)  shall 
judge...",  the  new  sentence  is  construed:  Being  no  enemies  and 
not  seeking  his  harm,  they  shall  judge  as  a  court. ^ 

2.  In  Lev.  XXIII,  22  we  read:...  ''and  the  gleaning  of 
thy  harvest  thou  shalt  not  gather  ;  unto  the  poor  and  the  stranger 
Shalt  thou  leave  them."  By  closely  connecting  the  end  of  the 
first  clause  with  the  beginning  of  the  next  clause,  the  sentence 
is  formed  :  ^Hhou  shalt  not  gather  unto  the  poor'\  intimating  that 
the  owner  of  the  field  has  no  right  to  gather  the  gleaning  in 
behalf  of  a  certain  poor  and  thereby  depriving  the  other  poor 
of  their  claim  to  that  gleaning  warranted  them  by  the  laws.^ 

B.     Restrictive  Rules  in  the  Application  of  Analogy. 

§  54 
By  way  of  a  plain  analogy,  particular  provisions  of  the 
law  concerning  a  certain  case  are  in  the  Talmud  often  trans- 
ferred to  another  case.  This  method  is  termed  ir:;o  "D ; 
(compare  above  p.  159).  The  phrases  used  in  this  process  are 
either....  JD  \1^^h^  or  ....]D  |J''"DJ,  we  derive,  learn  (this  pro- 
vision) from  (that  other  case  of...). 

The  use  of  analogy  for  such  purpose  presupposes  consisten- 
cy in  the  law,  so  that  its  provisions  in  one  case  were  intended 
to  apply  also  to  an  another  similar  case.  But  though  the  two 
cases  from  the  comparison  of  which  an  analogy  is  drawn  need 
not  to  be  alike  in  all  respects,  still  they  must,  at  least,  be- 
long to  the   same  sphere   of    the  law.     The     provisions    con 


nnwSD  pi  prj'V  i\sk^  t"nt  x^i\^c^'^  n"n  ^jc'^  ii\x 

Talm.  Sanhedrin  29a:  compare  Rashi's  commentary. 
»  Tal.  Gittin  12a-  ^jyn  HK  V^^DH  ^  ,^jyi5  Dpi^fl  ^ 


180  Hermeneutics  of  the  Talmud. 

nected  with  the  one  case  cannot  be  applied  to  another  case 
which  is  totally  different  in  its  legal  nature.  Hence  the  follow- 
ing restrictive  rules  in  the  application  of  analogy: 

In  a  ritual  case  we  do  not  apply  an  analogy  from  a  civil 
case,  and  vice  versa.  Berachoth  19aj  Baba  Metzia  20a;  Kid- 
dushin  3b. 

In  a  case  concerning  pecuniary  restitution  we  do  not  apply 
an  analogy  from  a  case  concerning  fine.  Kethuboth  46b;  Kid- 
dushin  3b. 

In  a  case  concerning  profane  things  we  do  not  apply  an 
analogy  from  laws  concerning  sanctified  things.  Pesachim45a; 
Shebuoth  26b;  Nazir  36b. 

4.    jmo:  i<b  DnnD 

From  an  extraordinary,  exceptional  case  we  make  no  ana- 
logy, i     Pesachim  44b;  Moed  Katon  Tb;  Chullin  98b. 

C.     Limited  or  Unlimited  Effect  of  an  Analogy. 
§55. 

When  provisions  of  one  law  (A)  are  to  be  applied  to  an- 
other law  (B)  by  virtue  of  a  traditional  analogy  (the  construc- 
tional Gezera  Shava,  compare  above  §  24),  the  question  arises 
whether  those  laws  are  to  be  treated  alike  in  every  respect,  so 
that  all  particulars  found  in  A  are  applicable  to  B  or  whether 
the  consequences  of  such  an  analogy  are  to  be  restricted  to 
the  main  provision  only.  Concerning  this  question  two  differ- 
ent opinions  are  expressed. 

^  A  similar  rule  is  also  laid  down  in  modern  law  interpretation; 
compare  Fr.  Lieber,  Legal  and  Political  Hermeneutics,  p.  i27G:  "An  ex- 
ceptional case  can  of  itself  sustain  no  analogy,  since  the  instance  from 
which  we  reason,  the  analogon,  must  always  be  one  which  implies  the 
rule". 


Additional  Rules.  181 

One  opinion, represented  by  R.  Meir,  holds:  nitSI  HjO  jn 
^'deduce  from  it,  and  again  from  it",  that  is  to  say,  any  further 
provision  connected  with  A  may  be  transferred  to  B. 

But  the  other  opinion  is:  «-inS3  ''(TiSl  HiD  jn  ''deduce 
from  it,  and  (as  for  the  rest)  leave  it  in  its  place",  that  is  to 
say,  after  having  transferred  the  main  provision  of  A  to  B,  we 
are  to  let  B  retain  its  own  character  and  the  provisions  ex- 
pressly connected  with  it. 

The  difference  between  these  two  opinions  maybe  illustrat- 
ed by  the  following  example. 

In  Deut.  XXIII,  3,  the  law  provides  that  a  Mamzer^  that 
is,  one  born  of  incest,  ''shall  not  enter  the  congregation  of  the 
Lord,  even  to  the  tenth  generation^  A  similar  provision  has  an- 
other law  concerning  an  Ammonite  and  a  Moabite:  ''''Even  to 
the  tenth  generation  they  shall  not  enter  into  the  congregation 
of  the  Lord, /^r  <f^'^r."  By  a  Gezera  Shava  the  conclusion  is 
made  that  also  in  the  former  law  concerning  Mamzer  the  phrase 
''even  to  the  tenth  generation"  is  to  be  understood  "for  ever". 
(See  above  p.  150). 

But  while  the  term  Mamzer  implies  the  female  as  well  as 
the  male,  the  masculin  form  of  the  words  ''liSlDI  ''JIDj;  is  taken 
by  tradition  strictly,  referring  to  males  only,  but  not  to  females 

According  to  the  opinion  of  nJDI  HiD  JH,  a  female  Mamzer^ 
after  the  tenth  generation,  might  be  admitted  to  enter  the  con- 
gregation ;  her  case  being  then,  in  all  respects,  analogous  to 
that  of  a  female  Amonite  who  is  exempted  from  the  prohibi- 
tion. 

But  according  to  the  opinion  of  snn«2  ''pISI  n:D  JH,  the 
two  laws  are  analogous  only  in  respect  to  the  meaning  of  the 
phrase  "even  to  the  tenth  generation",  while  the  expression 
Mamzer  always  retains  its  comprehensive  meaning,  including 
females  as  well  as  males.  See  Yebamoth  78b.  Another  ex- 
ample Shebuoth  31a. 


182  Hermeneutics  of  the  Talmud. 

D.     Refutation  and  Reinstatement  of  Hermeneutic 
Arguments. 

§56. 

The  generalization  of  a  Special  Law  (above  Chapter  III) 
may  be  refuted  by  the  objection  that  a  particular  circumstance 
is  connected  with  that  special  law  which  renders  it  unfit  to  be 
generalized  or  to  be  applicable  to  other  cases. 

The  phrase  used  in  such  a  refutation  is  the  same  as  that 
which  is  used  in  refuting  the  premise  of  an  inference  of  Kal 
Vechomer  (see  above  p.  137),  namely: ]Dtr  '^l^h^b  HD 

''Why  is  that  special  provision  made  for  the  case  A?  Be- 
cause that  certain  peculiarity  is  connected  with  this  case"  .... 

After  such  a  refutation,  the  attempt  is  usually  made  to  de- 
fend the  Binyan  Ab  by  a  reference  to  case  B  having  the  same 
provision,  though  not  connected  with  that  peculiarity.  If  then 
also  the  generalization  of  case  B  is  objected  to,  on  account  of 
an  other  peculiarity  connected  with  its  provision,  this  objection 
is  again  removed  by  a  reference  to  case  A  in  whicli  that  pecu- 
liarity is  not  found.  The  common  provision  of  A  and  B  is  then 
generalized  according  to  the  usual  method  of  '^^V^  2S  '(^22 
D''3inD.  (See  above  p.  160).  The  procedure  of  this  combined 
generalization  is  usually  introduced  by  the  following  phrase: 

''The  conclusion  returns  (that  is,the  former  argument  is  to 
be  reinstated),  for   A  is  not  like  B,  and  vice  versa,  but  the 

common  point  of  both  is "  Examples:  Maccoth  2b  ;  Sanhed 

rin  66a. 

Remark.  The  same  dialectic  procedure  and  the  same 
phrases  are  also  applied  where  a  refuted  inference  of  Kal  Ve- 
chomer is  to  be  reinstated  by  a  combination  of  two  similar  cas- 
es, as  in  Berachoth  35a  ;  Kiddushin  5  b;  B.  Metzia  4a,  and 
often. 

E.     The  Theory  of  Exten^sion  and  Limitation. 
§  57. 

The  term  ^i^n  means  extension]  t^l^'^D  limitation.     The  idea 


Additional  Rules.  183 

connected  with  each  of  these  two  terms  when  applied  separate- 
ly, was  explained  in  the  introductory  chapter  §  6  and  §  1. 
We  have  here  to  consider  their  meaning  when  applied  con- 
jointly toiJ?''D1  ^U*1  to  signify  a  theory  in  contradistinction  to 
that  ot  tDISl  hb^  (chapter  lY). 

In  as  much  as  a  general  term  (^^D)  denotes  an  indefinite 
number  of  individuals  having  something  in  common,  it  may  also 
be  regarded  as  ii^l,  an  extension  of  the  meaning;  and  in  as 
much  as  a  particular,  singular  term  (to*i£)  restricts  the  mean- 
ing to  definite  individuals,  it  maybe  regarded  as  toiy^'D,  a  lim- 
itation. 

That  which  in  the  theory  ofR.  Ishmael  is  called  :o*\S1  bb^f 
is  according  to  the  theory  of  R.  Eliezer  and  R.  Akiba  regard- 
ed as  tDiyDI  ""Un. 

There  is  the  following  difl'erence  between  these  two  the- 
ories. 

a)  In  a  combination  of  tD^SI  ^^5,  the  particular  is  regard- 
ed as  the  explanation  of  the  preceding  general,  so  as  to  narrow 
down  its  comprehension  to  the  strict  contents  of  the  particular, 
excluding  even  that  which  is  similar  to  this  {p^n^  '^b'^  ^^^2  J''S 
DISZ*^,  see  above  §  42). 

According  to  the  other  theory,  the  tDiy'D  merely  limits  the 
extension  of  the  preceding  ^l3*i,so  as  to  include  everything  sim- 
ilar, and  exclude  that  only  which  is  not  similar  to  it. 

r\'ar\  irstr  tsy'^m  3sn  nan  ,'^v)^n'\  ''un 

b)  In  a  combination  of  ^^^l  tD"lS  the  general  following  a 
particular  includes  everything  falling  under  the  general  (comp. 
Rule  Y.  §  43).  But  according  to  the  other  theory,  the  ''li"!  fol- 
lowing the  t:5'ij;''D  includes  that  only   which  is  similar   to  that 

c)  In  a  combination  of^^^i  tD^lSI  ^^3  we  include  only  that 
which  resembles  the  particular  (comp.  Rule  YI.  §  44). 

But,  according  to  the  other  theory,  the  rule  for  tDi;'''Di  '''12*1 
"'*13"i'I  is,  that  the  ^'\2*\  includes  everything,  even  that  which  is 
not  similar  to  the  tDI^^'D, the  e fleet  of  the  latter  being,  however, 
to  exclude  merely  one  single  thing  which  has  the  least  simil- 


184:  Hermeneutics  of  the  Talmud. 

arity  to  it.     To  define  this  one  thing  to  be  excluded,  is  entire- 
ly left  to  the  judgment  of  the  expounding  Rabbis.  ^ 

in«  n:n  «^«  id^'d  «^i  .^^n  n^n  •»um  taiy'^Di  ••inn 

The  theory  of  tSI^^'DT  ''131,  being  not  as  clear  and  exact  as 
that  of  loiSI  ^^D,  is  rejected  by  most  of  the  Tanaim,  and  ad- 
mitted only  in  some  special  cases.'' 

The  difference  between  these  two  theories  is  illustrated  by 
the  following  example. 

In  Levit.  Y,  2i-23,  the  law  provides  that  if  an  embezzler 
without  having  been  convicted  before  a  court,  but  prompted 
by  his  conscience,  wants  to  expiate  the  sin  of  his  injury  to 
some  person  in  respect  to  property,  then  he  has  to  restore  the 
fraudulently  acquired  property,  with  the  addition  of  one  fifth 
of  its  value,  and  besides  bring  a  trespass-offering.  The  law  in- 
troduces the  case  by  the  words: 

**If  a  person  commits  a  misdeed,  and  lies  to  his  neighbor 
(General)  concerning  a  trust  or  a  deposit  (Particulars),  etc.  etc. 
or  whatever  it  7iiay  be  about  which  he  has  sworn  falsely  (General), 
then  he  shall  restore  etc". 

According  to  the  theory  of  ^^^i  tDISl  ^^D,  these  expres- 
sions are  to  be  construed  in  a  way  that  the  mulct  of  one  fifth 
of  the  original  amount  is  required  for  such  embezzled  objects 
only  which  are  movables^  and  have  an  intrinsic  value^  the  former 
excluding  real  estate^  and  the  latter  excluding  bills  or  notes. 

But  according  to  the  theory  of  tD1^"'D1  *'121,  the  law  refers 
to  any  kind  of  embezzled  property,  including  real  estate^  exclud- 
ing, however,  bills  or  notes  which  have  merely  a  representative 
value. 

The  argumentation  according  to  these  two  theories  is  expressed  in 
the  following  way: 


*See  Rashi  on  Talm.  Kiddushin  21b,  and  on  Shebuoth  4b. 
'See  B.  Kamma  64b;  Shebuoth  5a;  Chullin  67a. 


Additional  RaLEa.  185 

B  A 

:"»ifii5;«»D'i  •'•'in-^  ty>m  nT:;''^«  'n  :"'iDnsi  •'^^d  ••trm  pan 

tD^D  —  n^  nDiEjTii  IK  inp23  Dia  —  t  noisjria  in  inpsn 

nnm  -itn  —  yntj'^  -lt^'N  !?dd  ifc<  fei  -irn  —  ynij'^  -ik'n  ^dd  in 

i^an  na-i  ^nni  toiy^io  ^un  taiDn  pyD  n^n  .n  nnx  ^n  &i  t:-iDi  i)^3 

^ij^D  ba  un  ^3n  ^nd  poD  laiii  ijoboon  -im  sj'-iidd  ld-ieh  no 

rbt^^DD  pNt^'  niypip  inv* 

Talm.    B.  Kamma  llYb;  Shebuoth  3Yb.  Other  examples :Succah 
60b;  Kiddushin  21b;  Shebuoth  26a. 

F.     <<MiKRA"  or  ''Masora"? 
§  58 

Although  our  vowel-signs  of  the  Biblical  text  were  not  yet 
introduced  at  the  Talmudic  period,  still  the  correct  pronun- 
ciation according  to  the  vowels  was  fixed  by  oral  tradition. 

The  reading  of  the  text  according  to  the  established  pro- 
nunciation was  called  «npD  (reading).  The  proper  spelling 
of  the  words  of  the  sacred  text  as  fixed  by  tradition,  letters 
without  vowels,  is  termed  Alasora  (nilDD  or  ""IIDD). 

The  peculiar  spelling  of  many  words  sometimes  admits  a 
meaning  somewhat  different  from  that  which  is  expressed  by 
the  established  pronunciation  or  our  present  vocalization. 
The  question  then  arises  whether  in  such  a  case  the  law  is  to 
be  intrepreted  according  to  the  vowel  reading  or  rather  accord- 
ing to  the  letters  with  which  the  word  is  spelled  in  the  Masora. 

In  this  respect  two  opposite  opinions  are  expressed  in  the 
Talmud.  One  holds:  i<-ipD^  DS  ir>  ^'The  source  of  law  is  in 
the  reading"  i.  e.  the  reading  of  a  word  according  to  its  estab- 
lished vocalization  is  essential  to  decide  its  meaning.  The 
other  opinion  is:  nniDD^  DS  tT"'  ^'the  source  is  in  the  Masoro^'' 
that  is,  the  spelling  of  the  word  as  fixed  by  the  Masora  is  more 
material  in  defining  its  meaning. 


186  Hermeneutics  of  the  Talmud. 

Example:  Speaking  of  the  cities  of  refuge  to  wMch  he  who 
unintentionally  killed  a  fellow-man  was  to  flee,  the  law  illustrates 
the  case  of  such  an  unintentional  homicide  by  the  following 
words:  As  when  a  man  goeth  into  the  the  woods  with  his 
neighbor  to  hew  wood,  and  his  hand  fetcheth  a  stroke  with  the 
axe  to  cut  down  the  tree,  |*yn  |D  ^T"l2n  h^*^^  and  the  iron  slip 
pelh  from  the  wood^  and  findeth  his  neighbor,  that  he  die,  etc." 
(Deutr.  XIX,  5.) 

According  to  the  opinion  of  ^<npt:^  DS,  this  passage  refers 
only  to  the  case  where  the  killing  happened  by  the  iron  of  the 
axe  slipping  from  the  helve.  But  according  to  the  opinion  of 
n^lDD^  DS  the  letters  of  the  word  h^^T\  admit  that  word  to  be 
read  h^T^  in  the  Piel  form,  so  as  to  give  the  sense  '^and  the  iron 
splints  a  piece  from  the  tree",  hence  this  passage  refers  only 
to  a  case  where  the  killing  happened  by  a  piece  of  wood  which 
the  axe  cut  from  the  tree. 

Maccoth  7b;  other  examples  Pesachim  86a,  and  Sanhedrin  4a. 

In  this,  as  in  most  of  other  cases,  the  opinion  of^npD^?  □« 
prevailed.  The  opposite  opinion  was  accepted  only  where  it 
served  to  support  a  traditional  interpretation  of  a  law;  for  in- 
stance, that  the  expression  of  D^-^iDH  nis:D  (Levit  XXIII,  40) 
which  the  Masora  spells  nS^D  (without  i)  refers  only  to  one 
branch  of  the  palm  tree  (Talm.  Succah  32a). 
CLOSma  REMARK. 

Concluding  this  exposition  of  the  principal  rules  of  Talmu- 
dical  Hermeneutics,  we  must  remind  the  student  that  this  sys- 
tem of  artificial  interpretation  was  mainly  calculated  to  offer 
the  means  of  ingrafting  the  tradition  on  the  stem  of  Scripture, 
or  harmonizing  the  oral  with  the  written  law. 

Modern  scientific  exegesis,  having  no  other  object  than  to 
determine  the  exact  and  natural  sense  of  each  passage  in  Scrip- 
ture, must  resort  to  hermeneutic  rules  fitted  to  that  purpose, 
and  can  derive  but  little  benefit   from  that  artificial  system. 


Closing  Remark.  181 

Thus  already  the  great  Jewish  Bible  commentators  in  the  Mid- 
dle Ages,  Ibn  Ezra,  Kimchi,  and  others  who  are  justly  re- 
garded as  the  fathers  of  that  thoroughly  sound  and  scientific 
system  of  exegesis  that  prevails  in  modern  times,  remained  in 
their  interpretation  of  the  Bible  entirely  independent  of  the 
hermeneutic  rules  of  Hillel,  R.  Ishmael  and  R.  Akiba.  Never- 
theless, this  system  deserves  our  attention,  since  it  forms  a  very 
essential  part  of  the  groundwork  on  which  the  mental  structure 
of  the  Talmud  is  reared.  It  must  be  known  even  in  its  details, 
if  the  Talmudic  discussions,  which  often  turn  on  some  nice 
point  of  the  rules  of  that  system,  are  to  be  thoroughly  under- 
stood. 


PART    III. 


TALMUDICAL  TERMINOLOGY  AND   METHODOLOGY 


TALMUDICAL  TERMINOLOGY  AND  METHODOLOGY. 

Prefatory. 

Like  any  other  branch  of  science  and  literature,  the  Talmud 
has  its  peculiar  system  of  technical  terms  and  phrases  adapted 
to  its  peculiar  methods  of  investigation  and  demonstration. 
To  familiarize  the  student  with  these  methods  and  with  the 
terms  and  phrases  most  frequently  used  in  the  Talmud  is  the  ob- 
ject of  the  following  chapters.  As  the  Mishna  is  the  text  on 
which  the  Gemara  comments,  we  begin  with  the  explanation 
of  some  of  the  terms  in  reference  to  certain  features  in  the 
structure  of  the  Mishna.  We  shall  then  proceed  to  the  various 
modes  and  terms  used  by  the  Gemara  in  explaining  and  discus- 
sing the  Mishna.  This  will  be  followed  by  an  exposition  of  the 
ways  in  which  the  Talmud  generally  discusses  the  reports  and 
opinions  of  the  Amoraim.  Finally,  the  methods  and  processes 
of  Talmudical  argumentation  and  debates  as  well  as  the  terms 
and  stereotyped  phrases  connected  therewith,  will  be  set  forth. 


A.     THE  MISHNA. 

CHAPTER  I. 

Terms  and  Phrases  regarding  the  Structure  of  a  Mishna 
Paragraph. 

nriD 

§1. 

xxA.  .viirihna  very  often  simply  lays  down  the  law  without 
mentioning  its  author  or  any  conflict  of  opinions  that  existed 
in  regard  to  it.  Such  a  Paragraph  of  the  Mishna  is  termed 
DHD,  an  anonymous  and  undisputed  Mishna.  Examples:  Bera- 
chothl,  4;  III,  1-3. 

Such  anonymous  and  undisputed  Mishna  paragraphs  are 
generally  regarded  as  authoritative.  They  are  mostly  of  a  ve- 
ry ancient  origin,  having  been  incorporated  into  the  work  of  R. 
Jehuda  Hanasi  from  older  Halacha  collections  made  by  former 
teachers,  especially  that  of  R.  Meir.  n\SD  '1  JTl'^jno  DHD 
Sanhedrin  86  a. 

§2. 
Often  also  the  Mishna  reports  a  conflict  of  opinions  in  regard 
to  a  certain  law.     Such  a  conflict  is   termed  npl^riD  a  division 
or  difference  of  opinion. 

The  conflicting  opinions  are  set  forth  in  different  ways: 

a.  After  having  laid  down  the  anonymous  rule  of  law,  the 
dissenting  opinion  of  a  certain  teacher  is  added  by:  *ii:2»x  ''JI^S  '^, 
Rabbi  A  says....  In  such  cases,  the  anonymous  author  of  the 
first  opinion  is  termed  in  the  Gemara  SDp  >sjn  ^/le  former  tea- 
cher.    Example:  Berachoth  lY,  1. 

Remark.  As  the  anonymous  opinion  represents  that  of  the  teachers 
in  general,  the  Gemara  sometimes  calls  it  also  D'DSn  ^"IDT  the  words 
(the  collective  opinion)  of  the  sages;  f.  i.  Sanhedrin  31a. 

b.  A  rule  of  law  is  laid  down  with  the  addition   n  ^i^T 


192  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

'fc<  '•il^S  these  are  the  words  of  Rabbi  A,  and  then  the  dissent- 
ing opinion  is  introduced  by  :  nQIS  '2  ''JI^D  '"^1  but  Rabbi  B 
says...;  or  the  question  of  law  is  propounded,  and  then  the  dis- 
senting opinions  concerning  it  are  introduced  by  nDlN  '^  ^l^b^  "^ 
^DIW  'Z  ''l^b^  "^*1.     Examples:  Berachoth  II,  1  and  3. 

Such  a  difference  of  opinion  in  which  the  opposite  views 
are  represented  by  single  teacliers  is  teimed  in  the  Gemara 
nTT'l  "ITT'  npl^no  a  difference  between  individuals. 

c.  The  opinion  of  a  single  teacher  concerning  a  question 
of  law  having  been  set  forth,  the  collective  opinion  of  other 
contemporary  teachers  differing  therefrom  is  introduced  by: 
D''"1D1S  D*'D:Dm  but  the  (other)  sages  say....  Example  :  Bera- 
choth YI,  4. 

Such  a  conflict  of  opinions  between  an  individual  and  a 
majority  of  other  teachers  is  termed  in  the  Gemara  npl^riD 
D^lll  ITI^  a  conflict  between  an  individual  and  the  ??iaJortty.  Gene- 
rally, the  opinion  of  the  majority  prevails.  This  rule  is  phrased: 
□''Dnr  riD^n  D''2ni  "iTI"'  where  an  individual  and  the  majority 
differ  from  each  other,  the  opinion  of  the  majority  is  Halacha 
(the  accepted  law).    Berachoth  9a. 

d.  The  conflicting  opinions  are  represented  by  different 
schools,  especially  those  of  Shamai  and  Hillel. 

Examples:     Berachoth  I,  1;  VIII,  1.  5.  7.  8. 
Remark.     In  a  conflict  between  those  two    schools  the  opinion  of 
the  School  of  Hillel  generally  prevails.     nj^O  nj^K  7\"2  D1pD3  ^"1   Be- 
rachoth 86b. 

§  3. 

Where  a  Mishna  paragraph  contains  provisions  for  two 
or  more  cases,  the  former  case  is  signified  by  t<t5^'»i  (the  case  at 
the  beginning),  and  the  following  or  last  case  by  i<S''D  (the  case 
at  the  end).  The  case  between  these  two  is  termed  t^ny^D 
the  middle  case. 

Example  for  a  Mishna  paragraph  with  two  cases:  B.  Metzia 
I,  3;  for  one  with  three  cases:  B.  Metzia  I,  4.  See  also  Gema- 
ra Kiddushm  63a;  Kerithoth  lib;  Chullin  94b. 

In  a  paragraph  divided  into  two  main  parts,  A  and  B, 
each  containing  two  cases,  a  and  b,  the  case  of  A  b  is  termed 
RK^'^m  fc<S'»D,  and  that  of  B,  a  «S''D'T  t^tt^n. 


Terms  and  Phrases  regarding  the  Mishna.  193 

Example:  Sliebuoth  YI,  7.  Compare  Talmud  Shebuoth 
43bj  B.  Metzia  34b. 

Remark.  A  part  of  a  Mishna  paragraph  referring  to  a  separate 
case  or  proposition  is  also  termed  ^533  I  gate,  section,  clause);  hence 
the  terms  Nti'm  K33  the  clause  of  the  tirst  proposition,  KS''DT  KD3 
the  clause  of  the  subsequent  proposition.     Sabbath  3a;  Yebamoth  18b^ 

D  y  D 
§  4. 

The  Mishna,  in  general,  simply  lays  down  the  rule  of  law 
without  stating  its  reason.  At  times,  however,  the  reason  is 
added.  The  reason  of  a  law  is  termed  DJ^ID.  It  is  either  based 
a)  on  a  biblical  passage  («np)  and  its  interpretation,  and  is 
then  usually  introduced  by  nDS:itr ;  or  b)  on  common  sense 
(N"13D) ;  or  c)  on  a  general  principle   (^^2). 

Examples:  a)  Berachoth  IX,  5;  B.  Metzia  II,  7.10.  b)  B. 
Metzia  I,  7;  II,  11.     c)  B.  Kamma  III,  10.11. 

Remark.  The  Gemara  generally  invertigates  the  reason  of  the 
law  where  it  is  not  stated  in  the  Mishna. 

§  5. 
Also  the  different  opinions  of  the  teachers  concerning  a  point 
of  the  law^are  generally  set  forth  in  the  Mishna  without  the  reason 
of  the  difference  being  added.  Occasionally,  however,  not  only 
the  reason  of  one  or  both  of  the  contradictory  opinions  is  stated, 
but  even  a  shorter  or  longer  controversy  is  recorded  in  which 
the  teachers  argue  in  opposition  to  each  other  on  .some  questions 
of  law.  Such  a  controversy  is  termad  in  tlie  Gemara  sn:n'72. 
The  elaborate  argumentation  pro  and  con  is  also  termed  s^^^D 
]nD^  or  in  Aramaic  s-i-iDI  i^hpU  (literally,  a  taking  and  giving 
of  arguments,  i.  e.,  a  aiscussion).  Examples  of  controversies  in 
the  Mishna:  Berachoth  I,  3;  Pesachim  YI,  2;  Taanith  I,  1;  B. 
Kamma  II,  6. 

n  ty  VD 

§  6. 
The  Mishna  sometimes  adds  to  its   rule  of  law  or  to  its 


194  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

opinions  of  the  contesting  teachers  the  report  of  a  certain  case 
in  which  a  celebrated  anthority  gave  a  decision  either  1)  in 
accordance  with  or  2)  in  contradiction  to  the  rule  jast  laid 
down  or  the  opinion  just  expressed.  Such  a  report  is  usually 
introduced  by  the  word  HD'^D  it  is  a  reported  fact  that...., 
it  once  occured  that... 

Examples  ad  1:  Berachoth  I,  1;  Bechoroth  lY,  4j  ad  2:  B. 
Metzia  YIII,  8;  Git  tin  I,  5. 

§  ^. 

The  word  ^^D,  often  occurring  the  Mishna,  signifies  a  gener- 
al rule,  a  guiding  principle  of  a  law.  Such  a  general  rule  either 
precedes  or  follows  the  details  of  a  law. 

Where  it  precedes  the  details,  it  is  usually  introduced  by 
the  words  I'lt:^  ^^3  they  (i.  e.  the  former  teachers)  established 
the  following  rule  concerning.... 

Examples:  Pea  I,  4;  Shebiith  YII,  1.  2;  Maaseroth  I,  1. 
Sabbath  YII,  1. 

Where  the  general  law  follows  the  details,  it  is  introduced 
by  hb^n  r.T  this  is  the  general  rule 

Examples:   Berachoth   YI,  1;  Pesachim  III,  1;   B.  Metzia 

lY,  1. 

Remark.  The  Gemara  usually  investigates  the  necessity  of  this  ge- 
neral rule  by  asking:  ^ND  ^^)ni6  what  is  this  to  add?  i.  e;  which  new 
cases  is  this  general  rule  to  imply  besides  those  expUcitly  stated  in  the 
details  of  the  law? 

§  8. 

Paragraphs  of  the  Mishna  containing  a  generalizing  or 
comprehensive  provision  are  introduced  by  h:2  or  ^^n  ^'all", 
'^every",  ''whatever".  Mostly  some  exceptions  from  such  a 
generalizing  provision  are  added  by  the  word  pn  ''except".. 

Examples:  Chagiga  I,  1;  Kiddushin  I,  6.  7.  9j  Gittin  II, 
5.;  Chullinl,l. 

Remark.  The  Gemara  finds  that  such  comprehensive  provisions 
are  not  always  exact,  as  they  often  admit  of  exceptions  besides  those 
expressly  stated  in  the  Mishna.     Erubin  37a;  Kiddushin  34a. 


Terms  and  Phrases  regarding  the  Mishna.  195 

§  9. 

Without  laying  down  a  general  rule,  the  Mishna  sometimes 
states  the  exact  number  of  cases  to  which  a  certain  law  refers 
and  then  specifies  those  cases  more  fully,  f.  i.  ''there  are  four 
main  kinds  of  damages  to  property,  namely...."  B.  Kamma  I, 
1;  or:  ''Marriage  maybe  contracted  in  three  ways,  namely..." 
Kiddushin  I,  1.     Such  a  stated  number  is  termed  «i'''':D. 

Remark.  The  Gemara  finds  that  such  a  number  is  intended  to 
limit  the  law  exactly  to  those  cases  mentioned  in  the  Mishna,  so  as  to 
exclude  certain  other  cases,  and  the  question  is  generally  made  : 
^KD  ^DIVD^  fc<J^^J)0  what  cases  are  excluded  by  this  limiting  number? 

§  10. 

Another  limitation  of  the  Mishna  occurs,  where  certain 
cases  are  enumerated  by  the  introductory  words  \hi<  ''these 
are..."  or  SN"I  IT   '^this  is..." 

Examples:  Peal,  1;  Pesachim  II,  5;Yebamoth  III,  3.  5. 

Remark.  Also  where  these  limiting  words  are  used  in  the  Mishna 
the  Gemara  usually  asks:  ^t<D  ^DiyO^J  what  cases  are  excluded  by  thi^ 
limitation? 

§   11. 

Still  another  limitation  admitting  of  no  other  exceptions 
t'lan  those  expressly  mentioned,  is  tound,  where  the  Mishna  points 
out  the  only  difference  that  in  certain  legal  respects  exists 
between  two  things,  by  the  limiting  phrase:  ...S^S....|''i  ]\S 
* 'there  is  no  difference  bet  ween...  and....  except  in  regard..." 

Examples:    Megilla  I,  4-11. 

§12. 
Where  the  Mishna  enumerates  different  cases  to  which  a 


196  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

certain  law  applies  without  fixing  their  number  and  without  using 
any  of  those  limiting  terms  mentioned  above,  the  enumerated 
cases  do  not  always  exclude  other  cases  to  which  the  same  law 
applies.  The  Gemarauses  in  this  case  the  phrase:  n^'^'l^T  ^<in 
''the  Mishna  teaches  concerning  certain  cases,  and  leaves 
others  to  be  added". 

Examples:  Taanith  14a;  B.  Kamma  10a;  Maccoth  21b. 

IT  rjx  IT  «^ 

§13. 

Where  in  enumerating  certain  cases  of  a  law  a  subsequent 
case  is  more  unexpected  than  the  preceding,  the  Gemara  uses 
the  phrase  •'inp  "IT  C)S*  IT  S^  ''the  Mishna  teaches  not  only  that, 
but  even  this,"  that  is,  the  Mishna  intended  to  arrange  the 
cases  in  a  climax,  starting  from  that  which  is  plain,  and  adding 
that  which  is  more  unexpected. 

Examples  :    B.  Metzia  III,  4  and  5.  See  Talm.  B.  Metzia 


Remark.  The  climax  in  the  arrangement  of  several  cases  is  also  ex- 
pressed by  the  Talmudical  phrase c.l^^DX  «!)N  X^y^D  i6  ,"l»Np  X^VIO  vh 
the  author  of  the  Mishna  states  here  a  case  of  "not  only";  not  only  as 
to... but  even  ..,  i.  e.,  the  Mishna  adds  here  to  that  which  is  unquestion- 
able (plain   and  obvious  enough)  that  which  is  more  unexpected. 

Examples:  Betza  37a;  B.  Kamma  54b;  Kiddushin  78b. 

IT  ^r2^h  ^n:;  j-'Si  it 

§14. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  Mishna  sometimes  arranges  the 
cases  of  a  law  in  an  anticlimax,  so  that  the  subsequent  case  is 
self-evident  from  the  preceding.  This  is  expressed  in  the  Ge- 
mara by  the  phrase:  IT  ^D^b  y^:^  |''«1  IT  ''that, and  it  is  unnec- 
essary to  say  this"  i.  e.  after  having  stated  the  law  in  the 
former  case,  it  applies  the  more  to  the  following  case. 

Example:  Rosh  Hashana  lY,  8;  see  Talm.  R.  Hashana 
32b,  33a. 


Terms  and  Phrases  regarding  the  Mishna.  197 

§  15. 

Of  these  two  antithetical  terms  the  Gemara  makes  frequent 
use  in  the  interpretation  of  the  Mishna,  especially  in  questions 
of  the  ritual  law.  n'^nnD^  means,  literally,  as  for  the  beginning^ 
at  the  outset,  beforehand,  previously.  The  term  denotes  the 
question  of  law  concerning  an  act  to  be  done,  whether  it  may 
properly  be  done  in  that  certain  manner  or  not. 

"layi  (contraction  of  12^  ''Si)  means  if  he  has  done.  In 
contradistinction  to  the  former,  this  term  denotes  the  question 
of  law  concerning  an  act  already  done,  whether  ii  is  valid  and 
acceptable  or  not. 

The  phrases  in  connection  with  these  two  terms  are: 

1.  n^'^nnn'?  I^'^SS  or  ••d:  n^^'nn^^  even  directly,  i.  e.  the  ex- 
pression of  the  Mishna  indicates  a  direct  permission  to  do  the 
act  under  consideration,  so  that  it  may  be  done  unhesitatingly. 

Example:  Tal.  Chullin  2a. 

2.  S*?  n^P'^nnD^  ]''t<  ^IT^I  tf  done,  yes,  but  directly  not  i.  e. 
only  if  it  has  already  been  done,  it  is  acceptable  and  legiti- 
mate, but  directly  permissible  it  is  not. 

Example:  Chullin  13b-,  15b. 

3.  '•DT  TStt^  "rayn  /S^  n^'^nnD^  directly  not,  but  if  done  it  is 
right,  i.  e.  it  ought  not  to  be  done,  but  if  already  done,  it  is 
acceptable  and  valid'. 

Examples:  Mishna  Berachoth  II,  3.  Terumoth  I,  6;Talm. 
Berachoth  15a  b. 

4.  S^  ''Di  "I3J^"'T  even  if  done,  it  is  not  accepted  as  valid. 
Examples:  Berachoth  15a;  Megilla  19b. 


»  Compare  the  phrase  in  thecivillaw:  Fieri  non  debet,  eed  fac- 
tum valet. 


B.     THE  GEMARA  EXPLAmiNG  AND  DISCUSSING 
THE  MISHNA. 

CHAPTER    IL 

Modes  of  Teeating  an  Anonymous  Mishna  Paragraph. 

§16. 
The  Gemara  uses  a  great  variety  of  modes  in  commenting 
the  Mishna  and  discussing  its  contents.  Generally,  the  com- 
ments are  introduced  by  a  query  which  is  intended  to  call  at- 
tention to  the  point  that  requires  elucidation.  This  method  of 
introducing  a  statement  or  explanation  by  queries  is  to  some  ex- 
tent already  found  in  the  Mishna  itself,  as  •'HD'^S^D  from  what 
time  on  may  we  read....?  Berachoth  I,  1.  2;  Taanith  I,  1;.."!^^^ 
how  are  benedictions  to  be  recited..?  Berachoth  YI,  1;VII, 
3;...nD2*l.-..nu3  with  what... and  with  what...?  Sabbath  II,  1; 
lY,  1  ;  YI,  1;...  J^^JD  whence  is  it  derived...?..  inT\Sl...  inPX 
which  are.. .and  which  are...?  B.  Kamma  II,  4;  B.  Metzia  Y,  1, 
and  many  other  similar  interrogative  phrases.  But  in  the 
Gemara  this  method  is  more  commonly  applied. 

The  following  is  an  outline  of  the  different  modes  and 
phrases  mostly  used  in  the  Gemara  at  the  outset  of  its  com- 
mentation and  discussion  on  the  Mishna. 

1.    Explaining  Words  and  Phrases  of  the  Mishna. 

§  n. 

Such  explanations  are  mostly  introduced  by  the  question: 
....''i^D   what  is-..^  or,  what  7?iea7is....1 

Examples:  Berachoth  59a;  Pesachim  2a;  Kiddushin  29a. 

In  answer  to  this  query,  the  explanation  is  generally  given 
in  the  name  of  a  certain  Amora.  Sometimes,  two  teachers  dif- 
fer in  the  answer;  f  ex.  Berachoth  29a;  Pesachim  2a.  Where 
the  schools  of  Babylonia  and  Palestine  differ  in  the  interpreta- 
tion,   that  difference  is   usually  expressed   by  ...  iDliin   ^s^^ 


Modes  of  treating  an  anonymous  Mishna.  199 

IIDS  nr\r\here  (in  Babylon)  they  explain...,  but  there  (in  Pales- 
tine) they  say...;  or...'iDuin  SDH  hereiXnyj  explain,..  ^DS*  'S  '"11, 
but  a  certain  (Palestinian)  Rabbi  says....;  f.ex.  R.  Hashana 
30b,  Sanhedrin  25a;  B.  Metzia  20a.  Sometimes,  however, 
i^Dn  refers  to  Sitra  in  opposition  to  other  Babylonian  schools; 
f.  ex.  Pesachim  42b;  B.  Bathra  61a. 

Remark.  Where  the  question  >i<D  is  followed  by...  ^'O'h^^^ifto 
say..  ?  is  it  to  say...."^  an  anticipated  explanation  is  to  be  rejected  as 
wrong;  f.  ex,     Berachoth  9b;  Kiddushin  29a. 

2.  Asking  for  the  Meaning  or  Construction  of  a  Whole 

Sentence  or  of  a  Statement  in  the  Mishna 
§  18. 

a.  ^DSp  "'S^D  what  does  he  (the  author  of  this  Mishna)  in- 
tend to  say  here? 

The  answer  to  this  question  is  generally  introduced  by: 
^Di<p  "'^n  thus  he  says....  Example  :   Sabbath  41a;  Taanith  27a. 

b.  yati'D  ''S'D   what  does  he  let  us  hear? 
Examples:  Sabbath  84b;  Sanhedrin  46b. 

Remark.  Different  is  the  meaning  of  the  question  y^B^c  '•XD,when 
followed  by.... n,  in  which  case  iL  ia  to  be  translated  by:  What  proves 
that....?  f.ex.  R.  Hashana  21b;  22b. 

3.  Asking  for  the  Object  of  a  Seemingly  Indifferent  ob 

Superfluous  Statement. 

§  19. 

a.  sriD^n  ""SD^  for  what  practical  purpose  is  this  (state- 
ment)? 

Examples:  R.  Hashana  2a;  Yebamoth  39a;  Kethuboth  82a. 

b.  ]h  yOuDp  ""SD  (abbr.  h"!2p  \S*D)  What  does  he  intend 
to  let  us  hear?    What  does  he  want  to  teach  us,  here? 

The  answer  to  the  latter  question  is  mostly  introduced  by 
».»b"1^jp  Sn  This  he  intends  to  teach  us,  that... 

Examples:     Pesachim  89a;  Sebachim  85b;  Meilah  21a. 

c.  SnD'^D^  "»«D   What  is  this  to  say?  Why  teach  this? 


200  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

Example:  Nazir  13a. 

4.    Investigating  the  Particular  Circumstances  of  a 
Case  referred  to  in  the  Mishna. 
§20. 

a.  p^'p'^Dj;  ''^Da  Of  what  case,  of  what  circumstances  do 
we  treat  here? 

Examples:  Betza  2a;  B.  Metzia  12b;  Gittin  3Tb. 

b.  •»D1  ^^in  (abbr.  Tn)  How  shall  we  imagine  this  case? 

Examples:  Megilla  18a;  Gittin  78a;  B.  Kamma  28b. 

Both  of  these  two  interrogative  phrases  are  mostly  follow- 
ed either  by  . . .  i<D"'^^S  if  to  say. . ;  ts  it  to  say. . .  ?  anticipating  an 
answer  which  is  rejected  at  once;  or  by  a  dilemma... •»^<...."»j<, 
//...?  and  if...1  presenting  two  anticipated  alternatives  to  either 
of  which  the  law  under  consideration  cannot  well  refer. 

The  answer  to  such  questions  is  introduced  either  by  s^H 
p^'pDj; ''«D2  Here  we  treat  of  the  case....,  or  by...  SD'^nX  «S 
no  (i.  e.  not  as  you  anticipated,  but)  necessarily....  (we  have  to 
imagine  the  case  under  the  circumstances  that...),  or  by.... 
D^iyS  howiver^  still  (i.  e.  notwithstanding  your  objection)  / 
say,,.. 

This  last  phrase  is  especially  used  when  one  of  the  altern- 
atives is  defended  against  the  objection  made  to  it. 

5.    Investigating  the  Biblical  Source  of  a  Law  Laid  down 
IN  the  Mishna. 

§21. 

The  question  introducing  such  an  investigation  is  either: 

f)  SiD,  contr.  ]^JD  (abbr.   V'JD)  Whence  do  we  have  this? 

Example:  Kidd.  14b;  22b  and  very  often. 

Or  I'^^D  ''in  «iD,  contr.  ^h^^  >':,v^yi:^  (abbr.  ^'T^d)  Whence 
are  these  words  (laws)? 

Examples:  Berachoth  30b;  35a  a.  v.  o. 

Both  of  these  questions  correspond  to  the  Mishnic  p^D, 
whence  is  it  derived? 


Modes  of  treating  an  anonymous  Mishna.  201 

CoiTectly  the  question  V'iD  is  applied  where  the  source  of 
only  one  single  point  of  the  law  is  to  be  investigated,  while 
D'TID  is  used  where  several  points  or  provisions  are  under 
consideration.  But  this  distinction  is  not  always  strictly  re- 
garded. 

In  answer  to  this  question  either  an  Amora  is  quoted  who 
points  to  the  source,  by  the  phrase:  sip  IDS!  for  Scripture 
says....,  or  reference  is  made  to  a  Bar  ait  ha  in  which  the  law 
in  question  is  artificially  derived  from  a  biblical  passage.  This 
reference  is  introduced  by:   n''m  for  the  Rabbis  have  taught.. 

Remark  1.  Instead  of  answering  the  question  of  j^JD,  the  Gema- 
ra  sometimes  repeats  the  same  question  with  astonishment:  I?pJD,  as 
if  to  say,  How  can  you  ask  such  a  question,  since  the  sourca  of  the 
law  under  consideration  is  obvious  enough  from  a  plain  bibUcal  pas- 
sage? The  original  question  is  then  set  forth  in  a  modified  form  by  the 
phrase:  pnONp  "•DH  px  We  mean  to  say  (ask)  thus:...;f.  ex.  Megilla  2a; 
Sanhedrin  68b;   Sebachim  89a. 

Remark  2.  In  answering  the  question  of  )^JD,  the  Amoraim  often 
differ,  one  deriving  the  law  from  this,  and  another  from  another  pas- 
sage. After  having  investigated  the  merits  of  their  different  deriva- 
tions, the  Gemara  sometimes  adds  another  biblical  basis  given  by  a 
Tana  in  a  Baraitha.  In  this  case,  the  phrase  is  used  :  rh  Nn^"'D  NJni 
feOniO  but  a  Tana  derives  it  from  this  passage... 

Example:  Betza  15b;  Chagiga  9a;  Kiddushin  4b;  see  Rashi  o  the 
first  mentioned  passage. 

6.    Investigating  the  Reason  or  the  Underlying  Principle 

OF  A  Law. 

§22. 

Such  an  investigation  is  generally  introduced  by  the  query 
WDytD  ''^D   (abbr.  tD"D)    What  is  the  reason? 

Examples:  Berachoth  33a;  R.  Hashana  32b;  Megilla  24a; 
B.  Metzia  38a. 

This  query  is  especially  made  in  regard  to  such  anonymous 
Mishna  paragraphs  where  the  law  contained  therein  is  evi- 
dently not  based  on  scriptural  grounds, but  merely  on  a  rabbin- 


202  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

ical  institution  or  principle.  But  in  regard  to  a  Mishna  con- 
taining a  difference  of  opinion,  the  question:...  'm  SD3;'i3  "'t^O 
'^Wiiat  is  the  reason  of  the  dissenting  Rabbi  A?"  is  often  also 
answered  by  a  reference  to  a  biblical  passage;  f.  ex.  Berachoth 
15a. 

Remark  1.  Exceptionally  the  question  D"D  is  found  in  Moed 
Katon  19a  in  the  sense  of  ^J^D  pjyS  "iii  what  respect?"  See  Rashi  on 
that  passage. 

Remark  2.     Where  the  reason  of  one  of  two  cases  or  one  of  two 
opinions  contained  in  a  Mishna  paragraph  is  clear  enough,  but  not  the 
other,  the  query  is  usually  set  forth  in  the  following  phrase: 
?KDyL3  ^NO  ....S*bx  ....DIK^D  i^D^^l 

It  is  all  right  (in  the  one  case)....,  there  it  is  on  account  of....,  but 
in  the  case  of...  what  is  there  the  reason? 

Examples:  Berachoth  33b;  52b;  Yebamoth  41b. 

Remark  3.  Sometimes,  both  questions  o"D  and  ]D"nJD  are  made. 
In  this  case  the  former  asks  for  the  underlying  principle,  and  the  lat- 
ter for  the  biblical  basis  of  that  principle;  for  ex.  Sabbath  24b.  The 
reversed  order  is  found  in  Betza  15b;  see  Rashi  on  that  passage. 

1.    Investigating  the  General  Basis  of  the  Particulars 

OF  A  Law. 

§23. 

The  Mishna  sometimes  starts  with  the  particulars  of  a  law 
without  having  stated  the  principal  law  to  which  those  partic- 
ulars refer.     In  this  case  the  Gemara  asks: 

....''jnp'T  ""Sp  i^lD^n  t^in  where  (on  what  basis)  does  the 
author  of  this  Mishna  stand,  that  he  here  teaches....?  i.e.  to 
what  general  law  does  he  refer?  or  where  is  the  principal  law 
of  these  particulars? 

Examples:  Berachoth  2a;  Taanith  2a;  see  also  Shebuoth 
lib. 

The  answer  is  introduced  by  the  phrase:  '•sp  Dnn  ''he 
refers  to  the  passage  there"....  (in  which  the  required  basis  is 
stated). 


Modes  of  treating  an  ano^^mous  Mishna.  203 

8.  Investigating  the  Authorship  of  an  Anonymous  Mishna. 

§24. 

The  Gemara  often  endeavors  to  trace  an  anonymous  Mish- 
na to  its  author,  i.  e.  to  find  out  whether  or  not  that  anony- 
mous Mishna  representsthe  opinion  of  a  certain  Tana  expressed 
elsewhere  in  another  Mishna  or  in  a  Baraitha.  Such  an 
investigation  is  introduced  by  one  of  the  following  phrases. 

a.  ...S^n  JSD  Who  is  that  Tana  (author)?...,  Berachoth 
40a;  Yoma  14a;  Megilla  19b. 

b.  ...in'^jnD  ''3D  or...tiD  in^'jnD Whose  opinion  represents 
■our  Mishna?...  B.  Kamma  33a;  Gittin  10a;  Nedarim  87a. 

c.  S^n  'S  "\  ?''JD  Sn  Whose  opinion  is  this?  It  is  that  of 
Rabbi  A...  B.  Metzia  40b. 

d.  *|^^hSiD  S^l  in''jnD  Our  Mishna  does  not  represent  the 
opinion  of....   B.  Kamma  32a. 

Eemark  1.  Where  the  investigation  is  merely  problematical  with 
a  negative  result,  it  is  generally  preceded  by  XD'b  (or  ND"*:),  is  it  to 
say...?  The  answer  is  then  usually:  ...SD^n  I^^DX,  you  may  even  say... 
(our  Mishna  agrees  with  the  opinion  of  that  Tana);  as:  jn'^no  ND""^ 
N^n  ^Xn  ^D  Ki3^,  is  it  to  say  that  our  Mishna  does  not  represent  the 
opinion  of  that  certain  Rabbi  in  the  Baraitha?  B.  Kamma  30a;  B. 
Metzia  2b;  Kiddushin  52b.  Sometimes,  it  is  also  phrased :  pn  ND^!^ 
5<OnD..'n3  (vhl)  Is  it  to  say,that  that  which  is  taught  here  anonymously 
does  (or  does  not)  agree  with  the  view  of  that  Rabbi?  Berachoth  25b; 
Betza  27b;  Bechoroth  28a. 

Remark  2.  Also  where  the  Mishna  records  a  dissenting  opinion 
of  the  sages  collectively  by  DnDlX  D^D^m,  the  Gemara  often  investig- 
ates D'CDn  jNJO,  Who  is  the  representative  of  these  sages  ?  f.  ex.  Giitin 
22a;  B.  Metzia  60b;   Sanhedrin  66a. 

9.  Investigating  the  Force  of  a  Comprehensive  or  a  Limiting 

TERM. 

A.    Comprehensive  Terms. 
§25. 
As  stated   above    chapter  I,  7.  8,  the  Mishna  often  intro- 


204  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

duces  the  provisions  of  law  by  general  and  comprehensive 
terms,  as  "ntDS  ^^D  ibb2r\  HT  ,b^n  ,h^  which  terms  are  assumed 
to  imply  other  cases  in  addition  to  those  expressly  mentioned. 
Investigating  the  force  of  such  a  comprehensive  term,  the  Ge- 
mara  usually  asks  :  \SD  ''''"inH^  What  is  this  to  include?  What 
is  this  term  to  add? 

Examples:  Pesachim  8a  ;  Chagiga  2a  j  Gittin  19a.  See 
Erubin  2a-3b. 

B.     Limiting  Terms. 
§26. 

Where  the  Mishna  is  making  use  of  a  limiting  term  (see 
above  I.  9.  10),  the  question  of  the  Gemara  is:  •'^D  ^tDlpD^ 
What  is  this  to  exclude? 

Examples:   Pesechim  76b;   Kiddushin  3a;  B.  KammalSb. 
10.     Investigating  the  Reference  of  a  Certain  Statement 
IN  THE  Mishna. 

§  27. 

After  having  laid  down  certain  provisions  of  the  law,  the 
Mishna  sometimes  adds  either  a  modification  or  a  dissenting 
opinion  without  clearly  stating  to  which  of  the  preced- 
ing provisions  this  addition  refers.  Investigating  such  a 
case  the  Gemara  usually  asks:  i^^TIt^  ^o  which  ?  i.  e.  to  which 
of  the  preceding  provisions  or  cases  does  this  addition  refer  ? 
This  question  is  generally  followed  by:....i<D"'^''«  shall  I  say.,,, 
(it  refers  to  the  latter  or  to  the  former  case)? 

Examples:  Berachoth  34b;  Kiddushin  46a;  Sanhedrin  79a. 

11.    Qualifying  a  Provision  of  the  Mishna. 

§28. 

Without  an  introductory  question,  the  Gemara  often  quali- 
fies a  provision  of  the  Mishna  by  limiting  its  application  to 
certain  circumstances.     The  phrases  used  for  this  purpose  are: 

a.     «^....^:3S....^^^S*  *irr  «^  they  only  taught  this  in  reference 


Modes  of  treating  an  anonymous  Mishna.  205 

to...,  (a  case   under  that  certain   circumstance),  hut  „  (under 
the  different  circumstance  of...)  not. 

Examples:  Berachoth  42b;  Succah  32a;   B.  Kamma  28a. 

b.  S^....^2S....Spim    only,,. .but,.,  not. 

Examples:  Yebamoth  98b;  B.  Bathra  146a;  Aboda  Zara 
74b. 

c.  The  shortest  phrase  for  this  purpose  is:  ....t^  Sim 
provided  that. .. . 

Examples:   Sabbath  53a;  B.  Metzia  11a;  Maccoth  6a. 
Eemark.    The  phrase  X^X    1i{^»  N^  corresponds  to     the   Mishnic 
phrase    DmON  Dnm  HDl  or  "•nD''t<. 

12.    Extending  a  Provision  of  the  MisHNA. 
§  29. 

Opposite  to  the  preceding  case,  the  Gemara  often  also  ex- 
tends the  effect  of  a  provision  above  the  limits  or  circumstan- 
ces indicated  in  the  Mishna.  The  usual  phrase  for  such  an  ex- 
tension is:  ....  I^-'SS  «^^^  *^DD....S^  not  strictly.,  (to  the  circum- 
stance  stated  in    the  Mishna  refers  this  law)   but  even... 

Examples:  Berachoth  53b;  Kethuboth  23a;  B.  Metzia  84a. 

Remark.  This  phrase  introducing  an  extension  of  the  law  is 
often  shortened  to  the  simple  word: ...  l^^SX  or  i5?^DN1  and  even...;  f.  i. 
B.  Metzia  22b;  26b;  Aboda  Zara  41a. 

13.    Making  Conclusions  and  Deductions  from  the  Mishna. 

§  30. 

A  conclusion  or  deduction  made  either  from  the  contents 
or  from  the  wording  of  the  Mishna  is  termed  fc^pri  (B.  Metzia 
8a)  or  S^pn  (Kethuboth  31b).  Such  conclusions  at  the  outset  of 
the  Gemara  form  generally  the  basis  of  a  subsequent  question 
and  are  introduced  by  one  of  the  following  technical  terms  and 
phrases: 

a St2^«  hence...,  consequently...,  f.  ex.    Yoma  14b; 

Betza  9b;  B.  Metzia  37a. 


206  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

b.  ...^3S...n  SCyta  the  reason  (of  the  decision  given  in  thi» 
Mishna)  is....,  but...  (under  different  circumstances  the  decision 
must  be  different)  ;  f.  ex.  Pesachim  9a  ;  B.  Kamma  4tb;  B. 
Metzia  18a;  25a. 

Remark.  This  latter  phrase  is  especially  used  where  a  conclusion 
is  made  from  a  positive  statement  to  the  negative,  or  vice  versa.  Such 
conclusions  are  sometimes  also  phrased:  i^^..  (xn)  pN...  (in  this  case) 
yes,  but...  (in  the  opposite  case)  not;  f.  ex  Berachoth  17b;  Nazir  34b; 
Chullin  18a. 

c.  ...n''J"'DyD^(abbr.  D"^)  ^^ar  from  this^  conclude  from 
this  that...f.  ex.  Berachoth  13a.  Interrogatively  it  is  phrased 
riTD  nyDli^  do  you  not  conclude  from  this...?  Yoma  37b;  San- 
hedrin  71a;  B.  Metzia  97b. 

Remark.  D"K^  is  mostly  used  in  deductions  by  which  a  legal  prin- 
ciple is  finally  to  be  established.  At  the  end  of  an  argument  the  phra- 
se )o"K'  expresses  the  acceptance  of  the  preceding  conclusions  as 
proved  and  correct,  and  is  then  to  be  translated  by:  you  may  hear  it 
herefrom,  it  is  proved  herefrom. 

d  ....  ^^2D  in  this  is  implied  that. . ,  from  this  follows  that. . . ; 
f.  ex  Pesachim  45a,  Sanhedrin  66a.  This  term  of  inference  is 
often  preceded  by:...  ''jnplD  since  the  Mishna  teaches..,  as  : 
hhy^"'  ^lT\Tr[u^  since  he  teaches....,  it  follows....;  f.  ex.  Bera- 
choth 43a,  B.  Kamma  2a;  or...y7Dn...''jnp  S^l...  ''jnplD  since 
he  teaches.... and  not....,  it  follows...;  f.  ex.  Kethuboth  90a. 

e nnDIS  nST  this  tells,    this   teaches  that....  This 

phrase  introduces  deductions  of  a  general  principle  from  a  spe- 
cial case  in  the  Mishna,  f.  ex.  Berachoth  20b;  Rosh  Hash  ana 
22a;  B.  Kamma  35b. 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE  GEMARA  CRITICISING  THE  MISHNA. 

Another  kind  of  questions  with  which  the  Gemara  intro- 
duces its  comments  on  the  Mishna  are  those  of  astonishment 
and  surprise  at  finding  therein  either  an  incongruity  or  an  in- 
consistency, a  superfluity  or  an  omission,  or  another  diflBculty. 
The  following  are  the  different  modes  in  which  questions  and 
objections  of  this  kind  are  set  forth  and  answered. 

1.    Finding  an  incongruity  of  Expressions. 
§  31. 

A.  Incongruity  in  one  and  the  same  Mtshna  paragraph. 

...  3  D^^DI -..3  nns  ''Why  begin  with...  (this  term  or 
expression)  and  then  end  with... (a  different  one)?" 

Example:  r\^2n2  □''*'D1  1^3  nns  B.  Kamma  27a.  Other 
examples:  Moed  Katon  lib,   B.  Bathra  17b. 

The  answer  is  usually. . . .  1i''\". . . .  li'^Ti  i^  is  this, . .  //  is  the  same\ 
i.  e.  both  expressions  are  identical,  mean  the  same  thing. 

B.  Incongruity  of  Expressions  in  Different  Parts  of  the 

MiSHNA. 

...  •»im  nnn  \^y^  •'^di  ....•'jm  s:Dn  ^t^  •'Sd  (abbr.  ^<'t) 

''Why  is  the  Mishna  using  here....  (this  expression),  and  thera. 
(a  different  one)?" 

Examples:  Sabbath  2b;  Kiddushin  2a;  Shebuoth  5a. 

Remark.  The  answer  to  this  question  is  sometimes  :  Nni3"l  XDH 
y^p  t<nU"i  Dnni  V'Cp  "by  that  change  of  expression  it  was  intended 
to  add  somethinsr  new  and  unexpected  here  asweU  as  there"  :  f.  ex. 
Kidd.  59b. 

2.    Finding  a  Tautology  in  the  Mishna. 

§32. 

The  technical  phrase  used  in  the  objection  to  a  tautology  is: 


208  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

...IJ^T.  ....li''*'"  ''Is  not....  (this  expression  or  case)  the  same  as... 
(that  other  one)?";  why  then  this  repetition? 

Examples:  Rosh  Hashana  23b;  B.  Kamma  17b;  Shebu- 
buoth  12b. 

3.  Objecting  to  the  Order  of  the  Stated  Cases. 

§  33. 

t<ti^'»n2...."'2n''^  «ti^'»^3....«jrn  t<:^  •'St:  why  does  the  Mish- 
na  just  teach  the  case  of....  first,  instead  of  teaching  that 
other  case  of... first? 

Examples:   Berachoth  2a:  B.  Bathra  108a;  Bechoroth  13a. 

4.  Objecting  to  a  Certain  Mode  of  Expression. 

§  34. 

a.  .»."'jn"«^  ....  ''jn'^D^  r\^h  no^  Why  does  the  author  of  the 
Mishna  use  the  expression....,  instead  of  using....  (that  other 
expression)? 

Examples:  Sabbath  90b;   B.  Metzia  2a;  B.  Bathra  98b. 

b.  ...^lT^....''irn  i<''TS  ''SD  What  does  he  intend  to  teach 
in  using  this  expression,  instead  of....? 

Examples:  Yebamoth  84a;  Kiddushin  69a. 

Remark.  The  answer  to  such  an  objection  is  often:  :33{<  xn^D 
b^Dp  n^miK  (In  using  this  expression)  he  lets  us  hear  something  by 
the  way,  namely...  ;  f.  ex.  Berachoth  2a. 

6.    Objecting  to  a  Certain  Limitation  of  a  Provision  in 

THE    MiSHNA. 

§35. 

•'Oi  1^''SS....  «*'VS  •««!::  Why  just  teaching.,.. since  the  law 
applies  also  to....? 

Examples:   Pesachim  50b;  Gittin  34b;  B.  Bathra  59b. 

6.    Finding  an  Omission  of  a  Distinction  between  two  Cases. 

§  36. 

The  objection  to  such  an  omission  is  generally  phrased  in 
the  following  way: 


The  Gemara  criticising  the  Mishna.  209 

'<The  Mishna  decides  here.... without  distinguishing  be- 
tween.... and...  ;it  is  right...  (concerning  the  one  case), but  why 
should  the  law  apply  also  to.... (the  other  case)?" 

Examples:  Succah  29b;  Gittin  10b;  Sanhedrin  18b. 

7.  Finding  an  Expression  to  be  Incorrect  or  too  Indefinite. 

§37. 

^r\])1  Sp^D  (abbr.  T'D)  Does  this  enter  your  mind?  i.  e.,do 
you  indeed  mean  to  say  this? 

Examples;  Yoma  67b;  Pesachim  42b;  Kiddushin  29a. 
Tbe  corrected  version  is  then  usually  introduced  by;   s^x 
..t<D"»fc<  but  rather  say.... 

8.     Finding  a  Term  or  Provision  to  be  out  of  Place. 

§38. 

iTDty  *^^*T  |SD  Who  mentioned  the  name  of  this?  i.  e.  what 
has  this  to  do  here?  how  is  this  to  be  mentioned  in  this  con- 
nection? 

Examples.   Sabbath  57a,    Pesachim  8b,  Nazir  4a. 

The  answer  to  this  question  is  generally  introduced  by  the 
phrase:  nOSp  ''^n  thus  he  means  to  say,  or  by  :  ^<-|D^"'D  ^^^Dn 
''jnp  ''Sm  something  is  omitted  here  which  must  be  supplied 
by  construction,  namely.... 

9.     Finding  a  Certain  Provision  of  the  Mishna  Unnecessary, 
being  too  Plain  and  Obvious  to  be  expressly  Mentioned. 

§39. 

^la^tys  "this  is  too  plain  1"  i.  e.,  why  make  this  provision 
for  a  case  which  is  so  plain  ?  why  state  that  which  is  a  mat- 
ter of  course? 

Examples:  Berachoth  20b;  47b;  Pesacliini  21b;  Megilla  25a. 

The  full  phrase  of  this  elliptical  expression  is   \so  S*tD'' w*3 


210  Terminology  AND  Methodology. 

S*-iD'^a^  it  is  too  plain,  why  then  expressly  say  (teach)  it?  f.  ex. 
Nedarim  16a. 

In  answer  to  this  objection,  the  Gemara  generally  tries  to 
show  that  under  certain  circumstances  the  provision  under  consi- 
deration is  not  as  plain  and  self-evident  as  it  appears  to  be  ;  or 
that  it  was  needed  m  order  to  prevent  some  possible  misunder- 
standing in  the  application  of  the  general  law.  Such  an  answer 
is  mostly  phrased  either: 

....  (y\^^)  i^h^  fc^D'^"!^'  isb  it  is  not  so  (plain),  as  it  is  needed 
for  the  case...;or:...  Hi'^fs^  -]ny-r  h*p^D  ^nt.'irs*  it  was  necessary 
to  state  this,  since  you  might  have  misunderstood  me  to  say...; 
or:  V'Dp...-St:*'rn  int:  what  you  might  have  supposed  is  that....; 
therefore  the  author  informs  us  (of  this  provision). 

Remark.  Different  from  this  meaning  of  the  word  t^tD'^tJ^S,  as  an 
elliptical  expression  of  astonishment  and  objection  is  that,  when  the 
word  precedes  a  propounded  question  of  problem,  where  two  cases 
are  set  forth  one  of  which  is  plain  and  obvious  enough,  but  not  the 
other.  In  such  a  connection  the  word  is  simply  a  statement  of  self- 
evidence,  and  is  to  be  translated  by:  this  case  is  clear  and  plain,  but 
(my  question  concerns  that  other  case);  f.  ex.  Berachoth  12a;  B.  Kamma 
8b;  Kiddushin  8b.  This  kind  of  ^5D*t^•D  is  generally  explained  in  Rashi's 
commentary  by  the  remark  t^mn^n  "in  calmness"  i.  e.  to  be  read  here 
not  as  a  question  but  in  a  calm  manner  as  a  plain  statement,  while  the 
other  kind  of  i<n"'Ii's2  is  explained  by  n^DDl  "in  astonishment".  As  a 
simple  statement  preceding  a  question  of  doubt  and  problem,  the  term 
t^tO-t^^a  is  sometimes  supplied  in  the  Talmud  by  the  word  ""^  "this  case 
is  plain  to  me";  f.  ex.  Sabbath  3b;  Megillah  3b. 

10.  Finding  an  Unnecessary  Repetition  of  the  Same  Provision 
already  stated  elsewhere. 

§  40. 

The  question  objecting  to  such  a  repetition  is  phrased: 
a.     (SiD'^T  Sin)    SJ^'Jn  V'Dp  \SD    What  does  he  inform  us 

here,  since  I  have  already  once  before  been  informed  thereof  in 

another  passage  of  the  Mishna? 


The  Gemara  criticising  the  Mishna.  211 

Examples:  Berachoth  50a;  Kctliuboth  42a;  65b. 

b.  s:d''T  kSin  sni  (Sn)  But  I  learned  this  already  once 
before. ... 

Examples:    Sabbath  89b;  B.  Metzia  55a;  Sanhcdrin  20b. 

c.  ...n''^  S:n  Sn  ^h  n^^  in  Sn  Why  do  I  need  this  again, 
since  he  taught  this  already  once  before?  Example:  Gittin  15a. 

The  answer  is  introduced  in  different  ways  according  to 
its  different  nature: 

a.     ...V'Dp  Sn  this  he  intends  to  inform  us  here,  that.... 

b n"*^  S*3'^1l2";>S  SS^D  on  account  of  the  addition  to  be 

made  here,  this  repetition  was  necessary. 

c.  ...s:D"'"\:f  it  was  necessary  (to  repeat  here  this  provi- 
sion), since.... 

d.  V'Dp  ..s:i^:2«  mn  '^SnO  •'S  if  to  derive  it  from  that 
other  Mislma,  1  might  have  supposed  that....,  therefore  here 
the  additional  information. 

Remark.  Where  a  similar  provision  is  found  in  two  Masechtoth 
concerning  different,  though  analogous,  cases,  the  question  of  unne- 
cessary repetition  is  not  raised,  but  the  Gemara  simply  states: 

....XD^lVI  ^Jli  ^Xn  '•^•.•.''33  ^DJ  pm  also  in  reference  to.. ..the  Mishna 
provides  for  a  case  similar  to  this,  but  both  of  these  provisions  are 
necessary,  for,... 

Examples:   Kiddushin  50a;  Gittin  74a;   B.  Metzia  119a. 

11.     Finding  in  a  Mishna  an  Unnecessary  Abundance  op 
Analogous  Cases. 

§41. 

a.  ^b  n^b  •'in  b^  Why  are  all  these  cases  needed? 
Examples:  Succah  lYa;  Kethuboth  23b;  Bechoroth  2a. 

b.  ("in  li'^Tl)  "^b  n^b  in  Sn  Why  is  this  case  still  added 
(since  both  cases  are  identical)? 

Examples:   Yebamoth  23b;  Kiddushin  65a;  Shebuoth  27b. 

c.  ...'^^n^^  n*-^  nr2b^  ..•^:r\:2b  n''^  nn^  Why  does  he  need 
to  teach... and  then  teach  again...? 

Examples:  B.  Metzia  33! >;  Shebuoth  27b;  Kiddushin  60b. 
The  answer,  always  introduced  by  S2''"i:f    ''it  is  necessary" 


212  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

or  •»::''*i"i  ^'allthe  mentioned  cases  are  necessary",  generally  at- 
tempts to  show  that  with  each  of  the  stated  cases  a  peculiar 
circumstance  is  connected  on  account  of  which  the  analogy 
with  the  other  case  might  have  been  objected  to,  hence  the  ex- 
press statement  of  all  cases.  The  phraseology  of  this  answer  is 
mostly:  Vnp  ...  i<J''i:«  H.n  ...  Sin  ''t<n  tor  if  the  author  had 
only  taught...  (that  other  case)  I  might  have  supposed....;  the- 
refore he  lets  us  hear  this. 

Remark.  The  question  "why  are  all  these  cases  needed?"  is  some- 
times omitted  and  the  Gemare  starts  with  the  explanation:  N3nvi  it 
was  necessary  (to  state  all  these  casesj,  since...;  f.  ex.  Sabbath  122a; 
Kiddushin  50b;  B.  Kamma  32b. 

12.     Finding  one  of  two  Cases  Superfluous,  since  a  fortiori 
Implied  in  the  Other. 

§42. 

The  question  based  on  the  argument  a  fortiori  is  generally 

phrased:  (ptr  ^D  «^)  s'^yzD  ...(s^n)  ...nnDS  ...(cnn  nDi)«ntrn 

if  (there  in  the  one  case)  you  say...  (that  the  decision 
is...)  can  it  here  (in  our  case)  be  questionable  ?  i.  e.,  is  it  not 
here  the  more  so,  why  then  state  the  other  case? 

Examples:  Rosh  Hashana  32b;  Pesachim  55b;  Yebamoth 
30a;  Shebuoth  32b. 

Remark.  The  answer  to  this  objection  is  sometimes,  that  the 
Mishna  intended  to  arrange  cases  in  a  climax  (IT  fjX  "»T  \^,  Rosh  Hashana 
32b),  or  in  an  anticlimax  (iT  ")Dlb  yxi  X^\  IT,  Kethuboth  58a).  Concern- 
ing these  two  phrases  see  above  §  13  and  §  14. 

13.    Finding  an  Omission  of  Cases  where  the  Mishna  ex- 
pressly Limits  their  Number. 
§43. 

a.  ...*'Di  ''in'?"!  (or  •'injl)  should  not  the  author  also  have 
added  the  case  of....? 

Examples:  B.  Metzia  55a;  Yebamoth  53a;  Zebachim  49b. 


The  Gemara  Criticisinq  the  Mishna.  213 

b S3'S  «m  (SD*"^)  ^b  im  are  thore  not  more   cases? 

but  behold,  there  is  the  case  of....  (which  is  not  mentioned). 

Examples:  Gittin  9b;  86a;  ChuUin  42a;  Menachoth  74b. 
14.  Finding  a  General  Rule  of  Law  not  Cover    g  all  cases. 

§44. 

...."»in  sin  S^^DI  Is  this  a  general  rule?  behold  the  case 
of...  (to  which  it  does  not  apply.) 

Examples:  Kiddushin  34a;  66b;  Temurah  14a;  ChuUin  59a. 

15.     Finding  a  Decision  of  the  Mishna  not  in  Accordance 
WITH  AN  Established  Principle. 

§45. 

....Wni ''SDS  or ''SDSI  Why  so  ?  How  is  this?  Is  this  not 
against  the  principle  of...? 

Examples:   Berachoth  47b;  Betza  31b;  B.  Metzia  94a. 

Remark.  The  question  >XDK  is  sometimes  omitted,  and  must  bo 
supplied,  f .  ex.  in  F^.  Metzia  99a;  Gittin  22b. 

16.     Finding  a  Different  Decision  regarding  two  Cases 
which  ought  to  have  been  treated  alike. 
§46. 

WS''D  ^1^  ''SD1  Sty'l  SJty  ''i^D  What  difference  is  there 
between  the  former  and  the  latter  case?  i.  e.,  since  the  two 
cases  mentioned  in  the  Mishna  are  seemingly  alike,  why  does 
the  decision  in  the  one  case  differ  from  that  in  the  other? 

Examples:  B.  Metzia  65b;  B.  Bathra  20a;  Kiddushin  64a. 

17.     Finding  an  Inconsistency  of  Principles  in  one  and  the 
SAME  Mishna  Paragraph. 
§47. 
The  phraseology  mostly  used  in  such  objection  of  inconsist- 
ency is: 

....  «D^s ....  nnosi...  S!:2'?«,...nnD«,  s^ti'p  «sii  sn  is  this 

not  self-contradictory  ?  you  say  ...hence....  and  then  you  say.... 
hence...?  i.  e.,  the  underlying  principle  or  the  consequence  of 
one  part  of  this  Mishna  contradicts  that  of  the  other  part. 


214  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

Examples:  Beracliotli  50a,  B.  Kamma  39,  B  Metzia  31a. 

When  the  self-contradiction  is  more  obvious,  the  objection 
is  simply  phrased: 

....Sw^"'"!  niDN*  is*m  but  did  you  not  say  in  the  first  part...? 

Examples:     Betza  31b;  Moed  Katon  13a;  Gittin  21b. 

Remark.  In  answer  to  such  an  objection,  the  Gemara  usually  at- 
tempts to  reconcile  the  contradictory  members  of  the  Mishna.  Some- 
times, however,  the  conti-adiction  is  admitted  by  th?  Dhrase:  ^D  S'^DH 
IT  T\2^*  i<b  IT  nJK^^  verily,  (or,  here  is  a  break!)  he  who  taught  this  part 
did  not  toach  the  other;  i.  e.,  this  Mishna  does  not  represent  the  opinion 
of  one  author,  but  the  opposite  opinions  of  two  different  teachers;  f.  ex, 
Sabbath  92b;  B.  K.  47b. 

18.     Finding  a  Law  Report  quoted  in  the  Mishna  to  be 

Contrary  to  the  Preceding  Law. 

§48. 

As  stated  above  §  6,  the  Mishna,  after  having  laid  down  a 
rule  of  law,  occasionally  adds  the  report  of  a  certain  case(niyj;D) 
in  which  a  celebrated  authority  gave  a  decision  in  accordance 
with  that  law.  Sometimes,  however,  that  decision  is  just  con- 
trary to  the  preceding  law.  In  this  case,  the  Gemara  starts 
with  the  question :  mnD^  n'^^D  is  this  report  to  contradict 
(the  preceding)?  i.  e.,  instead  of  corroborating  the  preceding 
law,  it  just  conflicts  with  it. 

Examples:  Betza  24a;  Gittin  66a,  B.  Metzia  102b. 

This  question  is  generally  answered  by:  ''^m  SnonD  •'11011 
f^np  something  is  missing  here,  and  thus  the  Mishna  ought  to 
read....  i.  e.,  the  Mishna  evidently  omitted  here  a  dissenting 
opinion  which  must  be  supplied  by  construction,  and  to  this 
opinion  the  report  refers. 

19.     Finding  a  Conflict  of  Authoritative  Passages. 
§49. 

Anonymous  and  undisputed  paragraphs  of  the  Mishna  and 
of  the  Baraitha  are  generally  regarded  to  be  authoritative 
(See  above  §  1).    But  the  Gemara  often  finds  such  a  paragraph 


The  Gemara  Criticising  the  Mishna.  215 

of  the  Mishna  to  be  in  conflict  with  another  passage  of  the  Mish 
na  or  of  a  Baraitha.  This  objection  of  contradiction  is  usually  in- 
troduced by: ...  N-i:i''Dm  (contraction  of  >ns*  SJS  ''ii^m)  I  raise 
against  this  the  question  of  a  conflict  of  authorities,  i.  e.  I 
find  this  Mishna  in  conflict  with  the  tollowing  passage  in  another 
Mishna  or  in  a  Baraitha.... 

Examples:  Berachoth  26a;  Taanith  4b,  Sanhedrin  33a, 
The  answer,  mostly  introduced  by  ;  S'ltrp  ^h  this  is  no  dif- 
ficulty^ generally  removes  the  contradiction  by  showing  either, 
that  the  conflicting  passages  treat  of  difi'erent  cases  or  circum- 
stances (...JSD1....JS3),  or  that  those  passages  represent  the 
opposite  views  of  diflerent  teachers  ('3  '"l  «m  'S'n  S*n). 

Remark  1.  Where  not  the  plain  Mishna,  but  its  underlying 
principle  or  its  consequence  is  in  disharmony  with  an  other  Mishna 
or  a  Baraitha,  there  the  question  inrD")!  is  preceded  by  an  argument 
pointing  out  that  principle  or  consequence.  Examples:  Berachoth  17b; 
Yoma  14b;  B.  Metzia  18a. 

Remark  3.  The  introductory  phrase  ^nrO"l1  is  often  omitted 
and  the  question  of  a  conflict  of  authorities  is  started  simply  by  ...pnm 
but  are  we  not  informed  in  another  Mishna  ...?  or  ...K-'inni  is  it  not 
stated  in  a  Baraitha  (differently)  ?  Examples:  Rosh  Hashana  27a;  B. 
Kamma61a;  Gittin  23b. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

TREATMENT  OF  A  MISHNA  CONTAINING  A  DIFFER- 
ENCE OF  OPINION. 
1.    Asking  for  the  Reason  of  the  Dissenting  Teacher. 

§50. 

....'m  t<t2VtiD  ''i^D  what  is  the  reason  of  Rabbi....  (the  dis- 
senting teacher)? 

The  answer  is  usually  followed  by  the  further  question 
NDp  ^jm  and  the  first  anonymous  teacher  ?  or  p^-n  and  our 
other  teachers?  i.  e.,  what  have  they  to  say  against  this  reason? 

Examples:  Berachoth  15a ;  44a ;  R.  Hashana  22a;  B. 
Kamma  23b. 

2.    Asking  for  a  Counter-argument. 
§51. 

The  Mishna  sometimes  records  an  argument  of  one  of  the 
dissenting  teachers  against  his  opponent  which  is  neither  ac- 
cepted nor  refuted  by  the  latter.  In  this  case,  the  Gemara 
usually  asks  for  the  probable  counter-argument  of  that  oppon- 
ent, in  the  following  way: 

?(3)  'm  (2)  "\h  (S)  'n  n^b  nDSp  n'lStr  Very  well  did  Rabbi 
A  argue  against  Rabbi  B,  What  then  had  the  latter  to  say? 

Examples:  R.  Hoshana  26a;  Megilla  27b;  Kiddushin  61a. 

3.     Finding  two  of  Several  Opinions  to  be  Identical. 

§52. 

iXfter  having  laid  down  an  opinion  concerning  a  case,  the 
Mishna  sometimes  adds  two  dissenting  opinions, one  of  which 
does  not  at  all  seem  to  difler  from  that  which  had  been  laid 
down  first.     The  Gemara  then  usually  asks: 

«!2p  «in  U''\-I  ....'n  (or  n''D::n)  is  not  the  opinion  of  R. 
So  and  So  (or  of  the  sages)  identical  with  that  of  tne  first  men- 
tioned teacher? 


Discussing  the  difference  of  opinion  in  a  Mishna.    217 

Examples:  Berachoth  30a;  Sanhedrin  15b;  Aboda  Zara  7b. 
The   answer   to  this    question  is  generally... in'''T3  SD'iS 
there  is  a  difference  between  them  concerning.... 

4.  Investigating  the  Principle  Underlying  the  Difference 

of  Opinion. 

§  53. 

"IID  (2)  'm...n2D  (S)  'n  ?^:^S''t2p  ""SDa  in  what  (principle) 
do  they  differ?  R.  A  holds...  and  R.  B  holds.... 

Examples:  Succah  16a;  Betza  26a;   Gittin  64b. 

Remark.  Where  such  an  investigation  is  problematic  only,  it  is 
introduced  by:  .,.-)2D  -iroi....l3D  IDT  ^i^D^Dp  «nn  N0^5?  is  it  to  say, 
that  they  differ  concerning  the  principle  of....,  so  that  one  holds  that 
...,  and  the  other  holds  that....?  The  answer  is  then  generally:  {<^ 
...^130  ^<Dby  N^IDT  No,  both  of  them  agree  concerning  this  princii)le, 
but  they  differ  concerning  another  principle,  namely,... 
Examples:     Pesachim  46b;   Nazir  62b;  Sanhedrin  23a. 

5.  Limiting  the  Point  of  Difference  between  the  Dissent- 

ing Teachers. 

§54. 

....^Dn  •'121.... ^2S  ...D   r\p^hn:2    the   difference   concerns 
only....,  but  regarding....  all  agree  that.... 

Examples:  Berachoth  41a,  Betza  9a,   B.  Kamma  61a. 

Remark.  Where  such  a  limitation  of  the  difference  between  Ta- 
naim  is  to  offer  a  basis  for  a  subsequent  question,  it  is  usually  phrased 
as  follows: 

.   .  *n....b3K....N^X^:^bQN*i5  jND  nV  so  far  only  they  differ  that...., 
but  CUXU-.  riling — both  of  them  agree  that. ..etc. 

Examples:    Sabbath  132a;  Yebamoth  50b;   B.  Metzia  28b. 

6.  Inquiring  why  the  Dissent  of  the  Teachers  in  one  Cask 

does  not  extend  also  to  the  other. 

§  65. 

••^•'^ST  «B''D  tr"i:Di  ^:^b^  s^i  sc"'-i  x:::»  \hd 

What  difference  is  between  the  former  and  this  case,  that 


218  Terminology  AND  Methodology. 

they  dissent  here  and  not  also  there  (though  both  cases  are 
seemingly  alike)? 

Examples:     Yebamoth  38a;  Kethuboth  78a;  Gittin  65a. 

Remark.  Sometimes  that  question  is  phrased  shorter  :  JI^S^I 
(i<t^''~l2)Nn3  ■'DJ  Ought  not  this  teacher  also  to  differ  in  the  other  case? 
Ex.  Sabbath  39a;   Nazir  11a;  Yeb.  118a. 

1.    Finding  an  Inconsistency  op  Opinion  in  one  op  the  Con- 
testing Teachers. 
§  56. 

a (^''^nm)  pnm 'in^m   Does  this  teacher  hold 

the  opinion....?  but  in  that  other  Mishna  (or  in  that  Baraitha) 
he  expresses  the  opposite  opinion? 

Examples;  Yebamoth  44a;  122a;  Kethuboth  56aj  Chul- 
lin  100b. 

b.  ...pnni-..'^^  n'^b  r.*'^'!  Does  this  teacher  not  hold  that 
...,  but  in  that  other  Mishna  he  expresses  himself  differently? 

Examples:  B.  Kamma  61b:  Aboda  Zara  6b. 

8.    Finding  an  Inconsistency  op  Opinion  in  both  op  the  Con- 
testing Teachers. 
§5r. 

....naD  (2)  ..'m  ....  n2D  (s)  ..'-n  i^^'Q^t^b 
....  {i^^:m)  pm  in^  jryDtr  «d3\^  sm 

Is  this  to  say  that  Rabbi  A  holds  that  ....,  and  Rabbi  B 
that....;  but  from  that  other  Mishna  (or  Baraitha)  we  under- 
stand just  the  reverse. . .  ? 

Examples:  Berachoth  Itb;  Pesachim  49b;  Kiddushin  64b; 
Sanhedrin  21a. 

Remark.  The  contradiction  is  generally  removed  by  the  answer 
that  in  one  of  the  conflicting  passages  n^^^n  nS^niD  "the  position  of 
the  contesting  teachers  is  to  be  reversed",  or  shorter  "|1Q^J<  "I  reverse", 
that  is,  I  correct  the  Mishna  or  Baraitha  by  placing  Rabbi  A  instead 
of  Rabbi  B  and  vice  versa.     To  such  a  correction  suggested  by  one  of 


Discussing  the  difference  of  opinion  in  a  Mishna.     219 

the  Amoraim,  another  sometimes  objects:  "jlQ^n  iO  "you  do  not  need 
to  reverse",  as  I  have  to  offer  another  way  of  reconciling  these  two 
passages. 

9.    Hypothetical  Conclusion  from  the  Opposite  Opinions  op 
Dissenting  Teachers. 

§68. 

If  you  should  find  (conclude)  that  according  to  the  opinion 
of  Rabbi  A....  (a  certain  case  must  be  decided  in  a  certain 
way),  then  according  to  the  opinion  of  Rabbi  B....  (that  case 
must  be  decided  differently). 

Examples:  Pesachim  lib,  121a;  B.  Metzia  40b;  Sanhed- 
rin  T8a, 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE  GEMARA  QUOTING  THE  MISHNA  AND  KINDRED 

WORKS. 
1.    Terms  Used  in  REFERRiNa  to  the  Mishna. 
§  59. 
In  contradistinction  to  the  extraneous  Mishna  or  Baraitha, 
also  called  ^<n''jnD,    the  authorized  Mishna  of  R.  Jehuda  Ha- 
nasi  is  termed  prT'jriD  or  ijnjw  rj  our  Mishna,  and  the  author  of 
a  teaching  contained  in  a  paragraph  of  this  Mishna,    is  desig- 
nated as  j"rn  i<:in   our  teacher^  in  contradistinction  to  ^<"ia  S^H 
the  teacher  in  the  Baraitha)   f.  ex.   Moed  Katon  17b;  B.  K.   61a. 
Quotations  from  the  Mishna  are  introduced  by: 

a.  pn  (contraction  of  jjt<  ^jn  we  learn,  study)  we  are  taught 
(in  a  Mishna). 

b.  cnn  pn  we  are  taught  there .  This  phrase  is  mostly 
used  when  a  Mishna  belonging  to  another  Masechta  is  to  be 
quoted;  f.  ex.  Yoma  2a;  B.  Metzia  9b.  Exceptionally,  how- 
ever, it  refers  also  to  a  passage  in  the  same  Masechta;  f.  ex. 
Pesachim  4b;  Maccoih  16a. 

C.  t^r^n  (='li"'J*J)  'we  have  learned^  we  have  been  taught 
in  a  Mishna  (rarely  referring  also  to  a  Baraitha). 

This  term  is  used  only  in  certain  phrases  as  SJ'ijn  V'Dp  \SD 
What  does  he  inform  us  here,  since  we  have  already  been  taught 
thereof  in  that  Mishna?  f.  ex.  Berachoth50a,or  S^jn  ^DJ  JJS  C]S 
we  have  also  a  Mishna  to  the  same  effect,  f.  ex.  Berachoth  27a. 

2.    Terms  Used  in  Quoting  the  Tosephta  and  Baraitha. 

§  60. 

a.  Sin  one  has  taught^  without  adding  any  subject,  mostly 
quotes  a  passage  from  the  Tosephta,  f.  ex.  Pesachim  53b;  B. 
Metzia  28  a. 

b.  ]i31  Ijn  (abbr.  "I'Tl)  our  Rabbis  taught^  refers  to  a 
well  known  Baraitha,  especially  to  passages  from  the  Mechilta, 
Siphra  and  Siphre. 


Quoting  the  Mishxa  and  kindred  Works.  221 

c.     S'^jn  it  is  a  teaching^  refers  to  a  Baraitha  in  general. 

Remark.  Two  or  more  Baraithoth  contradicting  each  other  are 
generally  introduced  byt-.-.-^n^K  N''jni...."|"1^N  K^JD-.-Nnn  "'Jn  in  one  Ba- 
raitha it  is  taught...;  in  the  other....  and  again  in  another....;  f.  ex. 
Maccoth  7b. 

3.     Different  Purposes  of  Such  Quotations. 
§  61. 

1.  pn  or  onn  pn,  at  the  outset  of  the  Gemara,  intro- 
duces another  Mishna  which  directly  or  indirectly  has  some 
bearing  upon  the  passage  of  the  Mishna  under  consideration ;or 
it  is  intended  to  use  the  latter  as  an  argument  in  a  discussion  on 
the  quoted  Mishna. 

Examples:  Sabbath  2a;  Pesachim  lib:  B.  Metzia  9b. 

Remark,  pnni  at  the  outset  of  the  Gemara  as  well  as  under  a  dis- 
cussion in  the  same,  raises  a  question  of  contradiction  or  incongruity 
from  the  cited  Mishna  ;  pni  or  pni  or  pn  N*?  '•D  adduces  a  support 
from  that  Mishna. 

2.  S3n,  at  the  outset  of  the  Gemara,  usually  introduces  a 
brief  quotation  from  the  Toscphta  explaining  or  qualifying  a 
certain  point  in  the  Mishna  under  consideration. 

Examples:  Berachoth  50b;  Yoma  19a;   B.  Metzia  28a. 

3.  S'^jri,  at  the  outset  of  the  Gemara,  introduces  a  pas- 
sage from  a  Baraitha  in  which  a  difference  of  opinion  mentioned 
in  the  Mishna  is  more  fully  set  forth  with  the  addition  of  some 
arguments. 

Examples:   Berachoth  12b;  Pesachim  27b;   Maccoth  Yb. 
Remark  1.     N^Jnm  raises  a  question  of  conti-adiction  from    that 
Baraitha.^     N''jn^  or  N^jm  or  ^<^Jm3  refers  to  the  Baraitha  as  an  ar- 


1  Exceptionally,  N^^nni  is  sometimes  used  not  as  a  question  of 
contradiction,  but  as  an  argument  in  sup[)ort  of  a  statement,  in  the 
sense  of  X'JnV  In  this  case,  Rashi  in  his  commentary  generally  re- 
marks: xn"in'':3  "in  calmness",  or  Nfiy'D  "a  support",  i.  e.,  the  phrase 
N'jnni  is  here  not  a  question,  but  a  cahn  statement  in  support  of  the 
prect'tling;  f.  ex.  Moed  Katon  19b  in  the  iir»tline;  Gittin  74b;  Kidd.  60b, 


222  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

gument  tn  support  of  something  stated  in  a  discussion.  The  phrase: 
^3n  ^DJ  X"'Jn  'W'e  have  also  a  Baraitha  to  the  same  effect,  is  used  to 
show  that  an  explanation  or  opinion  just  expressed  by  an  Amora  is 
corroborated  by  that  Baraitha,  while  the  phrase:  ...1  n^m^  K^Jn  we 
have  a  Baraitha  coinciding  with  ....  is  a  reference  in  support  of  au 
opinion  of  one  Amora  against  that  of  his  opponent. 

Remark.  2.  In  quotations  following  after  the  phrases  ^nyD"l1  "I 
raise  a  question  of  contradiction  against  this"  and  ^Q'TT'O  "they  object 
to  this  by  appealing  to  a  higher  authority"  the  terms  pn  as  well  as  t^^jn 
are  always  omitted,  thus  leaving  it  uncertain  whether  the  quotation  is 
from  the  Mishna  or  from  the  Baraitha.  In  most  cases,  however,  th"s 
can  be  ascertained  by  looking  up  the  parallel  passages  which  are  mark- 
ed in  the  marginal  glosses  of  the  Talmud. 

4.  p2^  l^ri  (abbr.  yn)  introduces  longer  passages  from 
a  well  known  Baraitha,  mostly  from  the  Tosephta,  Mechilta, 
Siphra  and  Siphre  which  stand  in  some  connection  with  the 
Mishna-paragraph  under  consideration.  Such  quoted  passages 
are  then  usually  explained  and  discussed  in  the  Gemara  in  the 
same  way  as  a  Mishna-paragraph. 

Examples:  Berachoth  16a;    Sabbath  19a;  B.  Kamma  9b. 

Remark.  -|''m  "for  the  Rabbis  taught''  usually  introduces  the 
answer  to  the  question  of  |^JD  or  D"n  SJC  (See  above  §  21.)  -|"n  is 
never  used  as  a  question  or  objection,  hence  not  n"n  XHI,  but  instead 
thereof,  t<"'jnm  is  used. 

5.  yril  i<nb  kSyjn  "what  we  read  in  this  Mishna  has 
reference  to  that  which  tlie  Rabbis  taught".  The  meaning  of 
this  often  used  phrase  is,  the  Mishna  before  us  supports  the 
following  Baraitha,  so  as  to  make  it  authoritative. 

Examples:     B.  Metzia  25a;  Maccoth  8b;  Kiddushin  29a. 

4.    Referring  back  to  a  Preceding  Quotation. 

§62. 

There  are,  besides,  two  peculiar  terms  of  reference  which 
are  often  used  in  the  Gemara  for  the  purpose  of  indicating  that 
a  quotation  incidentally  made  in  a  preceding  discussion  is  now 


Quoting  the  Mjshna  and  kindred  Works.  2i!3 

to  be  taken  up  as  a  main  subject  of  investigation  and  discus- 
sion.    The  terms  indicating  this  are: 

a.  *1D  "\i2S  the  master  (teacher)  said  above..,. 
Examples.     Berachoth  2a;  Pesachim  5b;  B.  Kamma  33b. 

b.  SS12  (the  body,  the  substance,  the  subject)  meaning, 
that  which  was  mentioned  above  iiv^slcntallj  is  now  to  to  be  the 
main  subject.  This  term  is  usually  translated  by:  it  was  stated 
above;  our  text  says\  returning  to  our  subject. 

Examples:  Berachoth  40b;  Pesachim  16a;  Sanhedrin  24a. 

The  difference  between  these  two  terms  is  that,  as  a  rule, 
the  former  is  used  in  reference  to  a  quotation  from  the  ^Mishna 
or  Baraitha,  and  ssi:i  in  regard  to  a  quoted  saying  of  an  Amora. 

Remark  1.  This  rule  admits,  however,  some  exceptions,  as  on 
the  one  hand,  ID  I^ON  is  occasionally  also  applied  to  a  saying  of  an 
Amoia;  f.  ex.  Rosh  Hashana  20b;  Yoma  21b;  Gittin  12b;  on  the  other 
hand,  SSIJ  is  sometimes  found  as  a  reference  to  a  Baraitha  and  even 
to  a  Mishna,  especially  a  Mishna  belonging  to  those  sections  to  which  no 
Gemara  is  extant;  f.  ex.  Berachoth  18a;  Succah  14a;  Kiddusliin  4a. 
See  Rashi  on  Succah  14a,  s.  v.  ^^H  Xm^^-  In  B.  Kamma  13a,  both  terms 
are  used  as  references  to  the  same  Baraitha. 

Remark  2.  Different  from  ID  "iDt?,  in  ihe  above  mentioned  sense, 
are  the  phrases  -|D  "IDS!  "for  the  teacher  said"  and  -yo  "IDNHI  "but  did 
not  the  teacher  say?"  which  are  used  where  in  an  argument,  reference 
is  made  to  a  well  known  saying  of  an  anonymous  author;  f.  ex.  Be- 
rachoth 4a;  B.  Metzia  6a. 


0.       M  E  M  R  A. 

CHAPTER  VI. 

Definition  of  and  Phrases  concerning  Memra. 
§  63. 

In  contradistinction  to  the  teachings,  opinions  and  deci- 
sions of  the  Tanaim,  contained  in  the  Mishna  and  Baraitha,  a 
reported  teaching,  opinion  or  decision  of  the  Amoraim  is  termed 
Memra  (SID'^D),  a  saying. 

This  term,  like  that  of  Amora,  is  derived  from  the  verb 
IDS  to  say,  which  verb  is  mostly  used  in  reference  to  the  ex- 
pounders of  the  Mishna;  while  the  verbs  n^tT  and  •'jn  are  more 
restricted  to  references  to  Mishna  and  Baraitha. i 

As  a  characteristic  term  designating  a  reported  teaching 
of  the  Amoraim,  the  word  Memra  is  but  rarely  met  with  in  the 
Talmud;  f.  i.  Gittin  42b;  B.  Bathra  48a.  More  frequently  it 
occurs  in  the  post  -  Talmudic  literature.  In  the  Gemara  such 
reported  opinions  and  decisions  of  Amoraim,  especially  con- 
cerning legal  matters  are  generally  termed  Sh' maattha{^r\'r\'^)yi'"^ 
that  which  was  heard  by  tradition,  f.  ex.  Berachoth  42a;  Sab- 
bath 24b:  Chullin  46a),  in  contradistiction  to  Agadatha^  a  re- 
ported homiletical  teaching. 

A  Memra  is  generally  introduced  by  the  word  *\i::s  a  certain 
Amora  said,  related;  sometimes  also  this  word  is  preceded  by 
the  term  nDHS  (contraction  of  nDSnS)  it  has  been  said,  it  is 
reported. 


'  Compare,  for  instance,  the  two  modifying  phrases:  ..n!^X  '\'W  n'^ 
and  i<5?X  p)05<  ^,  the  former  exclusively  used  in  reference  to  a  state- 
ment of  the  Mishna,  and  the  latter  to  a  teaching  af  an  Amora.  In 
connection  with  a  Memra  the  verb  j^jri  is  used  only  in  certain  phrases 
as:  ...NnK...'':'l!?Q1  Nn^  ^Jn?D1  N^"'^{  "some  report  the  just  quoted  saying 
of  that  Amora  in  reference  to  the  following  case....";  f.  ex.  Berachoth 
8b;  Sanhedrin  28b;  Aboda  Zarah  3b. 


Phrases  concerning  Memra. 
A.    nD« 

§  64. 

a.  now  preceding  the  name  of  a  teacher,  as  2*1  ^Dt<,  gener- 
ally introduces  an  interpretation,  opinion,  principle  or  decision 
of  law  originated  or  reported  by  that  Amora,  and  not  disputed 
by  another,  while  IDS  following  the  name,  as  "IDS  2"1  indicates 
at  once  that  he  is  to  be  contradicted  by  another  teacher,  hold- 
ing a  different  view  on  that  subject,    as  nDS  ^SID^I.-.^DS  2"i. 

b.  'Z  *^^^b^  ids  't<  '^l^b^  nt2«  refers  to  a  report  which  a 
disciple  or  a  contemporary  makes  concerning  a  teaching  which 
he  received  orally  from  its  author,  as  ^«iDti^  IDS  min"'  3"l  "IDS 
Rab  Juda  said  that  Samuel  said  (Berachoth  12a). 

But  ("7  rT'DtS^D  or)  'S  DltTD  'D  IDS  refers  to  a  report  con- 
cerning a  teaching  which  he  indirectly  received  from  an  author- 
ity of  a  former  generation,  as  :  ''DV  '1  UW^  ]T\V  'n  nDS  R. 
Jochanan  reported  in  the  name  of  R.  Jose  (Berachoth  7a). 

Where  a  different  version  existed  concerning  the  teacher 
who  reported  or  in  whose  name  something  is  reported, that  dif- 
ferent version  is  conscientiously  added  either  by  n^  ''"IfSSI  and 
some  say  it  was....  (Berachoth  4a);  or  SDTl^SI  (contracted  of 
i<12*^r\  •'SI)  there  are  some  who  say  it  was....  (Berachoth  5a), 
or  Dltyo  r\2  itStST  and  some  differ  therefrom,  saying  it  was  in 
the  name  of...  (Rosh  Hashana  10a). 

d.  irT'^inn  ""nDSI  'Z  ^2^b^^  'S  •'^I^S  Both  of  the  two  teach- 
ers a  and  B  said...  This  phrase  introduces  an  opinion  con- 
cerning which  two  Amoraim  fully  agree,  though  they  mostly 
differ  from  each  other,  as  irT'Tinn  ''"iDSI  ^SIDITI  21  Both  Rab 
and  Samuel  said..  (Berachoth  36b). 

B.    iDns 
§65. 

The  word  IDHS  it  7aas  said,  it  is  reported^  especially  at  the 
beginning  of  a  passage  in  the  Gemara,  generally  introduces  a 
Memra  containing  a  difference  of  opinion  or  a  controversy 
(t^n^l^S)  between  two  or  more  Amoraim.  Such  differences  ana 
controversies  concern  either: 


226  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

a.  The  proper  reading  of  a  passage  in  the  Mishna,  as 

pn  nyiD  u'^xi  ir^x  n^ar  m  ions? 
pn  nyio  irx  nox  xsd  m     B.  Kamma  37a. 
Other  examples:   Pesachim   64b;  B.  Metzia  80a;   Shebu- 
oth  16a. 

b.  The  reason  of  a  law  laid  down  in  the  Mishna. 
Examples:    Gittin  lib;  B.  Kamma  22a;  B.  Metzia  38a. 

c.  The  meaning  of  an  expression  used  in  the  Mishna,  as 

i^DD  10:0  -i^N  21  id:d  -iohj^ 
21V0  iDi<  bi^^Di:^)       Gittin  52b. 
Other  examples:   Kiddushin  60a;   B.  Bathra  106a. 

d.  The  final  decision  in  a  case  concerning  which  the  Ta- 
naim  expressed  opposite  opinions,  as: 

B.  Kamma  48b;  B.  Metzia  33a;  Sanhedrin  28b, 

e.  A  principle  of  law  not  clearly  stated  in  the  Mishna, as: 

*DT  Q^n  -iDisj^D  -irDt^  nm  ni^^^  ir^)^  i^nx 
"•Dl  &'\:^2  irDi^  5|DV  m        B.  Kamma  56b. 
Other  examples:  Pesachim  30b,  B.    Metzia  21b,  Sanhed- 
rin 27  a. 

f.  A  case  not  provided  for  in  the  Mishna. 

Examples:  Berachoth  25a;    Kiddushin  43a;  B.  Kamma  9a. 

Remark.  There  are  also  Memras  containing  a  controversy  with- 
out being  introduced  by  the  term  "iDD^J,  f .  ex.  Gittin  2a;  B.  Kamma 
8b;  Aboda  Zara  2a.  On  the  other  hand,  this  term  is  occasionally  ap- 
plied also  to  a  Memra  containing  no  controversy,  for  instance  Kiddu- 
shin 4oa;  especially,  where  reference  is  made  to  such  a  Memra  in  order 
to  corroborate  or  correct  the  opinion  of  a  later  Amora  by  the  phrase:... 
••OJ  "iDflS  we  have  also  a  Memra  of  a  former  authority  to  the  same 
effect,  f.  ex.  Gittin  13b;  or...n^y  IDriK  {<n  is  not  a  certain  Amora  re- 
ported having  remarked  concerning  this...?  f.  ex.  Gittin  16b;  B.  Metzia 
29b.  Besides,  this  word  is  used  in  certain  phrases,  as  :  IN^)  "'J'lPDT  ^5^ 
*lDni<  nbb^'O  XPJ<  IDm^  J:^n"'D2  the  opinion  ascribed  to  Amora  A  was 
not  expjessly  stated  by  him,  but  it  is  merely  implied  in  an  occasional 
decision  given  by  him;  f.  ex.  Berachoth  9a;  Sabbath  29a;  B.  Kamma 
20b. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

TREATMENT  OF  A  MEMRA  CONTAINING  A  SINGLE 
OPINION. 

1.    Questioning  the  Authenticity-  of  the  Reported  Memra 

§66. 

The  correctness  of  the  Memra  is  questioned,  since  the 
same  author  expressed  elsewhere  an  opinion  which  is  in  con- 
flict with  that  contained  in  this  Memra.  Such  a  question  is  al- 
ways  phrased  :  (s::3''S) IDS  fc<m  ''IDH  'S  "^DS  '•Dl     Did  that 

Amora  really  say  so  ?   But  is  he  not  reported  as  having  said.... 
(something-  implying  just  the  opposite  opinion)? 

Examples:  Berachoth  24b;  Pesachim  30a;  B.  Kamma  29b. 

In  answer  to  such  a  question,  the  Gemara  generally  tries 
to  show,  that  in  one  or  the  other  way  the  two  contradicting 
Memras  can  be  reconciled. 

Remark.  All  Amoraim  being  regarded  as  having  equal  authority, 
the  objection  that  another  Amora  expressed  an  opinion  conflicting 
with  the  Memra  under  consideration  is  generally  not  admitted. 
Where  such  an  objection  is  attempted,  it  is  rejected  by  the  phrase  ; 
n'O"!  Np  NiDiS  f^ina  how  will  you  raise  an  objection  from  the  opinion 
of  one  man  (teacher)  against  that  of  another  (who  has  the  same  au- 
thority and  is  entitled  to  have  an  opinion  of  his  own)?  Taanith  4b; 
Sanhedrin  6a;    B.  Kamma  43b, 

Sometimes,  however,  such  an  objection  is  admitted,  especially  in 
the  case  where  the  opinion  of  an  Amora  is  in  conflict  with  the  gener- 
ally accepted  decision  of  a  former  leading  authority  among  the  Amo* 
raim.  In  this  case,  the  objection  is  phrased:  ....^<^1?  ^J"'N  Is  that  so  ? 
but  that  other  Amora  (expressed  an  opinion  which  conflicts  with 
that  under  consideration).  Examples:  Berachoth  14a;  Moed  Katon 
•20a;    Betza  9a  ;  compare    Rashi's  reiuirk  on  the  last  mentioned  pas- 


228  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

2.    Finding  the  Memra  to  be  Colliding  with  a  Mishna  or 

A  Baraitha. 

§67. 

The  objection  is  raised  against  the  author  of  the  Memra 
that  the  latter  is  in  conflict  with  an  undisputed  Mishna  or  Ba- 
raitha, the  authority  of  which  is  superior  to  that  of  an  Amora. 
Such  an  objection  is  generally  introduced  either  by  the  phrase 
''^^TD  they  (i.  e.  the  members  of  the  academy)  refuted  it,  they 
raised  a  point  of  contradiction  from  the  higher  authority  of  a 
Mishna  or  Baraitha,  or  rT'^Tl''^  he  raised  against  this  a  point 
of  contradiction  from  a  higher  authority,  or  •'Jt^s  a'TiD  a  cer- 
tain teacher  refuted  this,  or  simply  by  ]jnm  but  are  we  not 
taught  in  the  Mishna  ?  S^'jnm  are  we  not  taught  in  the  Ba- 
raitha. . . .  (difi'erently)  ? 

Examples:  BerachothlOb;  RoshHashana6b;  B.  MetzialOa. 

Remark.  Such  an  objection  or  refutation  from  a  higher  autho- 
rity is  termed  sn^lTI-  The  argument  of  the  objection  often  closes 
with  the  phrase  ^J^5?S"?  Xnnvn  this  is  a  refutation  of  that  Amora;  or 
Nnnvn  ?  ^JI^ST  NnHVn  is  this  not  a  refutation  of  that  Amora  ?  It  is  a 
refutation!  (i.  e.,  the  point  of  refutation  is  well  taken).  Mostly  how- 
ever the  objection  is  removed  by  showing  that  the  Mishna  or  Baraitha 
referred  to  treats  of  a  different  case  or  different  circumstances,  and  such 
a  defense  is  introduced  by  the  phrase:  ...'2  "|S  "iDN  that  Amora  might 
say  (in  answer  to  this  objectionj  that...;  f.  ex.,  Berach«  th  34a;  B. 
Kamma  14a. 

3.    Finding  the  Memra  to  be  Superfluous. 
§68. 

The  Memra  is  shown  to  be  unnecessary,  since  the  same 
opinion  which  the  Amora  expresses  therein  is  already  stated 
in  a  Mishna.  This  objection  is  phrased:  ^J^jn  V'Dp  ''SD  what 
does  that  Amora  let  us  hear,  since  we  have  already  been 
taught  that  in  the  following  Mishna. .  ? 

Examples:  Berachoth  46b;  Taanith  10a,  B.  Kamma  35b. 


Treatment  of  a  plain  Memra.  229 

Remark  1.  This  objection  is  mostly  removed  by  showing  that 
the  Memra  contains  something  in  addition  to  the  I\Iishna. 

Remark  2.  The  question  i)"op  '•ND  is  not  raised  where  the  opinion 
of  the  Memra  is  not  expressly  but  merely  impliedly  contained  in  the 
Mishna.  In  this  case  the  Mishna  is  referred  to  just  to  corroborate  the 
Memra  by  the  phrase  i^y^n  '•DJ  pN  PjK  we  have  also  a  Mishna  to 
the  same  effect;  f.  ex.  Berachoth  27a;  Yoma  26b;  Aboda  Zara  8a. 

4.     Corroborating  the  Memra  by  a  Baraitha. 
§69. 

Such  a  corroborating  Baraitha  is  generally  introduced  by 
the  phrase:  •'Dn  "'Is:  S"*:;!  (abbr.  n"jn)  a  Baraitha,  too,  teaches 
thus;  or,  we  have  also  a  Baraitha  to  the  same  effect. 

Examples:  Berachoth  9b,  Taanith  10a;   Sanhedrin  23a. 

Remark.  The  question  :  '*Why  does  the  Amor  a  need  to  teach 
that  which  is  already  stated  in  the  Baraitha  ?"  is  never  raised,  since 
the  Amora  was  expected  to  know  every  Mishna,  but  not  every  Ba- 
raitha. 

6.  Corroboraiting  the  Memra  by  one  op  another  Authority. 

Sometimes  one  Memra  is  corroborated  by  another  one 
which  is  introduced  by  ...''DJ  nDn«  we  have  also  another  Mem- 
ra to  the  same  effect.  Such  is  especially  the  case  where  the 
Memra  of  a  Babylonian  Amora  is  supported  by  one  of  a  Pa- 
lestinian authority. 

Examples:  Chagiga  24a;  Gittin  13b;  Sanhedrin  29a. 
6.     A  Different  Report. 

§n. 

After  a  Memra  has  been  treated  in  the  above  stated  ways, 
a  different  report  (''nDSI  fc<:D''S  some  sa3^,some  report....)  is  some- 
times introduced  in  which  the  Amora  referred  to  just  expresses 
the  opposite  opinion.     The  discussion  then  turns  the  tables,  so 


230  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

that  every  objection  which  was  made  to  the  former  report,  be- 
comes now  a  support,  and  every  former  support  an  objection. 
Examples:  Berachoth  10b;  Betza  13a;  Maccoth  3b. 
7.     Correcting  the  Memra. 

§T2. 

Strong  objections  having  been  raised  against  a   Memra,  it 
is  sometimes  re-established  in  a  rectified  form  by  the  phrase: 

...*lDn«  ''Dn"lDns  *»«  8^t<   but  if  such  Memra  was  report- 
ed, it  must  have  been  reported  in  the  following  way.... 

Examples:  Berachoth  15b;   Yoma  28a;  Kiddushin  lib. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

TREATMENT  OF  A  MEMRA  CONTAINING  A  DIFFER- 
ENCE OF  OPINION. 

1.  The  Difference  concerning  the  Correct  Reading  of  a 

MiSHNA  Paragraph. 

Each  of  the  contesting  teachers  argues  for  the  correctness 
of  his  way  of  reading;  the  argument  being  based  either  on  the 
context  of  the  Mislma  under  consideration,  or  on  a  common 
sense  reason.  The  question  is  then  finally  settled  by  referring 
to  another  Mishna  or  to  a  Baraitha  in  support  of  one  of  the 
two  ways  of  reading. 

Examples:     B.  Kamma  3'7a;B.  Metzia  80a;  Shebuoth  16a. 

Remark.  Sometimes,  both  ways  of  reading  are  declared  to  be 
admissible  by  the  phrase:  CJ>nn'^D  vh  ...-"Jm  \^D)  .K^DDK^D  K^...."'jm  |«D. 

"He  who  reads  the  Mishna  in  this  way  is  not  wrong,  and  he  whr 
reads  it  in  the  other  way  is  neither  wrong,  for..." 

Examples:    Succah  50b;   Yebamoth  17a;  Aboda  Zara  2a. 

2.  The  Difference  concerning  the  Explanation  of  a  Term 

OR  Passage  in  the  Mishna. 

The  supposed  arguments  for  and  against  each  of  the  differ- 
ent explanations  are  investigated  in  the  following  way: 

Question  1:  '3  ^il'^SD  nos  «^  tO"D  'N*  ""Jl^a  Why  does  the 
Amor  a  A  not  explain  as  Amor  a  B? 

Answer:  ...."^^ -iDS  he  might  say...  (I  have  the  following 
objection  to  his  explanation..) 

Question  2:  ?  "]i\si  and  the  other  (teacher  B)  ?  i.  e., 
how  will  be  he  remove  this  objection? 


232  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

The  answer  having  been  given,  question  1  is  again  direct- 
ed to  B:  why  does  he  not  explain  as  A?  This  question  is  then 
treated  in  a  similar  way  as  the  former. 

Examples:   Gittin  17a;   B.  Kamma  22a;   Sanhedrin  25a. 

3.    The  Difference  concerning  the  Reason  of  a  Law. 

§  t5. 

The  practical  consequence  of  adopting  either  of  the  two 
reasons  assigned  to  the  law  by  the  contesting  Amoraim  is  in- 
vestigated by  asking: 

irT'^rz  ^N*D  what  is  the  difference  between  them?  i.  e.,  in 
what  respect  does  it  make  a  difference  in  the  application  of  the 
law, whether  this  or  the  other  reason  be  assigned  to  it? 

The  answer  is  always  introduced  by  the  phrase  :  is*2\s 
...in''^i"'2   there  is  (it  makes)   a  difference  concerning.... 

Examples:  Gittin  2b;   B.  Metzia  15b;  Sanhedrin  24b. 

4.     Investigating  the  Principle  underlying  the  Difference 

OF  Opinion. 
§T6. 

Where  the  difference  between  the  contesting  Amoraim  in- 
volves a  principle  of  law,  that  principle  is  investigated  by  the 
question  :  "'^^^''Dp  ''SD3  in  what  do  they  differ?  Or,  What  is 
the  point  of  difference  ?  On  what  general  principle  do  they 
disagree  ? 

Examples:   Pesachim  63b;   Gittin  34a;  B.  Metzia  15b. 

Remark.  Before  defining  the  difference,  sometimes  the  points 
are  stated  in  which  both  sides  agree,  and  which  therefore  are  exclud- 
ed from  the  discussion.  This  is  usually  done  in  the  following  phrase: 
....^J^^D  ^D  •'y^S  i6  (ND^jy  ^^1D)....XDMi)D  As  regards.... they  (both  of 
the  contesting  teachers)  do  not  disagree,  but  they  differ  concerning.... 

Examples:    Yoma  6b;  Pesachim  30b;  B.  Metzia  21b. 

5.    Showing  Consistency  of  Opinions  in  both  of  the 
Contesting  Teachers. 

§n. 

After  having  stated  the  difference,  the  Gemara  shows  that 


Memra  containing  a  difference  of  opinion  233 

the  divergence  of  opinions  in  this  case  is  in  full  accordance 
with  the  opposite  views  or  principles  expressed  elsewhere  by 
the  same  teachers.  The  phrases  used  in  showing  such  consist- 
ency of  opinion  in  both  of  the  contesting  Amoraim  are: 

a.  in''Dj;t2^  ntkSI  they  go  according  to  their  principles, 
i,  e.,  they  differ,  each  following  his  own  principle. 

Examples:  Sabbath  34b;  Pesachim  29a,    Shebuoth  15b. 

b n''Dj;tO^  '3  '':^b^^  n'^Dpti^  '«  ••a^^S  Amora  A  follows 

his  principle,  and  also  Amora  B  follows  his  principle.... 

Examples:  Pesachim  29b;  Gittin  24b;  B.  Kamma  53a. 

Remark.  The  phrase  in''»yD^  IITXI  is  used  where  reference  is 
made  to  another  dispute  between  the  same  teachers,  while  n^»yt27  'Q 
refers  to  a  principle  laid  down  by  either  of  the  two  teachers  independ" 
ently  from  each  other. 

6.    Discussing  the  Difference  of  Opinion. 

§78. 

By  the  introductory  phrase:  j?Diy  «n  (abbr.  t:^"n)  Comg 
and  hear,  or:  H'^i'TT'S  or:  >3''n"'D  a  certain  teacher  o^  they  (the 
members  of  the  academy)  objected  (by  appealing  to  a  higher  au- 
thority), a  Mishna  or  a  Baraitha  is  referred  to  in  suport 
(yi^D  or  s*ny"'D)of  the  opinion  of  one,  and  as  a  refutation  (snziTi) 
of  that  of  the  other  of  the  contesting  Amoraim.  A  discussion 
then  usually  follows  with  the  object  of  rejecting  the  support 
or  repelling  the  attack.  The  result  of  that  discussion  is  ei- 
ther that  the  question  at  issue  remains  undecided,  or  it  is  decided 
against  one  and  in  favor  of  the  other  of  the  contesting  Amoraim. 
The  usual  phrase  in  the  latter  case  is: 

(.'2  '•:'i'?2-T  nTiiiD  sn^^m)  i  snnvn  ?  's  '^rbtr\  snnvn  ''is 

this  not  a  refutation  of  the  opinion  of  Amora  A?  It  is  a  refu- 
tation! And  the  decision  is  according  to  the  opinion  of  Amora  B." 
Examples  :  Sanhedrin  27a;  B.  Metzia  21b-22b;  Chullin 
28a.  Examples  of  not  distinctly  decided  discussions:  Pesachim 
30b-31b;   B.  Kamma  56b-57b;  B.  Metzia  38b. 


234  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

Remark.  Commenting  on  a  Mishna-j  aragraph  which  has  some 
bearing  on  a  well  known  difference  of  opinion  between  Amoraim,  the 
Gemara  sometimes  starts  with  the  question,  whether,  or  not  this  Mishna 
offers  an  argument  in  favor  of,  or  against,  the  opinion  of  one  of  these 
Amoraim.    The  phrases  used  in  such  an  investigation  are: 

a.  ...'sh  T]^b  y^"'DD  i^D''b  is  it  to  say,  that  this  Mishna  supports  the 
Amora  A? 

Examples:  Succah  15b;  Betza  11a;   B.  Kamma  62b. 

b T  Kn^vn  ^inn  i^D^h  is  it  to  say,  that  this  Mishna  is  a  refuta- 
tion of  Amora  B? 

Examples:    Sabbath  9b;  Succah  15a;  Yoma  19a. 

7.     Tracing  back  the  Difference  between  Amoraim  to  one 

BETWEEN  TaNAIM. 

§T9. 

After  having  treated  a  Memra  in  accordance  with  the  above 
stated  methods,  the  Gemara  often  attempts  to  show  that  the 
same  difference  of  opinion  between  the  two  Amoraim  is  already 
found  among  two  Tanaim.  For  this  purpose  a  Mishna  or  a 
Baraitha  is  quoted  containing  a  difference  between  Tanaim 
concerning  a  subject  which  has  some  bearing  upon  the  differ- 
ence under  consideration.  The  point  of  discussion  becomes 
now  whether  or  not  the  principle  underlying  the  difference  be- 
tween those  two  Tanaim  is  identical  with  that  under  considera- 
tion, so  that  Amora  A  agrees  with  Tana  A,  and  Amora  B  with 
Tana  B.     The  phrases  introducing  this  investigation  are: 

a.  ''Sjn^  i<^^h  (or,  SD'':)  is  it  to  say,  that  this  difference 
is  like  that  between  Tanaim? 

Examples:  Pesachim  31a;  Gittin  14b;  Sanhedrin  27a. 

b.  '•i^SVJJp  ('2V«  n^iSin)  ...I  S*n:i^52  S^O"'^  is  it  to  say, 
that  these  Amoraim  differ  according  to  the  difference  of  opinion 
between  those  Tanaim  A  and  B? 

Examples:  Shebuoth  25a;    Maccoth  lib;  Nedarin  6b. 


Memra  Containing  a  Difference  of  Opinion.  235 

Remark.  Like  other  investigations  of  the  Gemara  introduced  by 
HD''b  or  ND''J,  also  this  attempt  leads  generally  to  a  negative  result,  as 
it  is  finally  shown  that  the  principle  implied  in  the  difference  between 
the  Tanaim  does  not  at  all  concern  the  case  under  consideration.  But 
where  after  a  discussion  between  Amoraim  the  Gemara  simply  states: 
■•i^Jn^  "this  is  like  the  difference  between  Tanaim",  or  S''n  "'N^n  "this 
difference  is  identical  with  that  of  the  Tanaim",  (f.  i.  Berachoth  22a; 
R.  Hashana  15a;  B.  Metzia54a)  that  statement  is  generally  not  disputed. 

8.    Supporting  Each  of  two  Contesting  Teachers  by  a 
Baraitha. 

§  80. 

Two  anonymous  Baraithoth  are  referred  to,  one  of  which 
agrees  with  the  opinion  of  one,  and  the  other  with  that  of  the 
other  of  the  contesting  Amoraim.  The  phrase  used  in  this  case  is, 

'2  '^^^h^l  rT-min  S'^^n  'N*  '^rh^l  -'^miD  i^^:n  there  is  a  Ba- 
raitha agreeing  with  the  opinion  of  Amora  A,  and  a  Baraitha 
agreeing  with  the  opinion  of  Amora  B. 

Examples:    Yoma  4a;  Betza  6a;  Gittin  18a. 

9.    Ascertaining  the  Authorship  of  two  Opposite 
Opinions. 

§81. 

There  are  Memras  reporting  that,  concerning  a  certain 
question,  two  Amoraim  A  and  B  differed  from  each  other,  one 
holding  one,  and  the  other  the  opposite  opinion,  without  clear- 
ly stating  which  is  which,  that  is,  who  of  tlie  contesting  Amo- 
raim holds  the  one,  and  who  the  otlier  opinion,  as: 

...nt:s  "Tm...n»s  in  '3  "^ri^si  \s  •'ii^s  ...n^ns  it  is  reported, 

that  concerning.... the  Amora  A  and  Amora  B  expressed  differ- 
ent opinions,  one  holding.... and  the  other... 

In  treating  such  a  Memra,  the  Gemara  usually  tries  to  find 


236  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

out  the  representative  of  each  opinion  by  referring  to  another 
case  in  which  one  of  these  two  teachers  expressed  a  certain 
view  which  coincides  with  one  of  the  two  opinions  under  con- 
sideration. 

Such  an  investigation  is  always  introduced  by  the  phrase: 
...IDS!  Sin  ''JI^Sl  D'^^non  it  maybe  ascertained  that  it  is  the 
Amora  A  who  holds.... If  the  argument  is  accepted,  this  is  in- 
dicated by  the  closing  term  D^TiDJl  it  is  correctly  ascertained, 
or  D"ty,  hear  it  from  this. 

Examples:  Berachoth  46a;  Megillah  27a;  B.  Kamma  29b. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

D.     ASKING  AND  ANSWERING  QUESTIONS. 

Classification  of  Questions. 
§  82. 

According  to  their  different  nature,  the  questions  asked 
in  the  Talmudic  discussions  may  be  divided  into  the  following 
classes: 

1.  Questions  of  investigation. 

2.  Questions  of  astonishment. 

3.  Questions  of  objection. 

4.  Questions  of  problem. 

Remark.  The  Talmud,  besides,  often  makes  use  of  the  rhetoric 
interrogation,  that  is,  that  figure  of  speech  which  puts  in  the  form  of  a 
negative  question  what  is  meant  to  be  strongly  affirmative,  and  in  the 
form  of  a  positive  question  what  is  meant  to  be  a  decided  negation,  as: 
Mfh  N^N   is  it  then  not—?  =  it  is  certainly  so. 

pn  ifh  ^D  are  we  not  taught  in  the  Mishna  ?  =  we  are  certainly 
taught  so. 

^3n  "lOX  ^D  did  he  say  so  ?  =  he  cannot  have  said  so. 

m2D  "'D  do  you  think..?  =  you  can  not  think  so 

1.    Questions  of  Investigation. 

§  83. 

As  already  stated  above  (§16.),  the  Talmud  mostly  in- 
troduces its  explanations  and  investigations  by  a  query,  the 
object  of  which  is  to  call  attention  to  the  point  which  requires 
elucidation,  as  >SD  what  is  the  meaning  of....?  j<dj;id  ^SD  what 
is  the  reason....?  j^jo  whence  do  we  have  this? 

Such  questions  are  generally  asked  anonymously,  while  the 
answer  is  mostly  given  in  the  name  of  a  certain  teacher,  'S  "IDS 
the  teacher.... said  (in  answer  to  this  question)... 

Remark.    To  investigate    a  subject  by  questioning  is  sometimes 


238  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

termed  'a  m  •>in  a  certain  teacher  asked  investigatingly  concerning 
this  matter  (B.  Kamma  7a;  Kethuboth  58b;  Nedarin  38b);  nn  p^lin 
we  asked  investigatingly  concerning  it  (Berachoth  45b;  Sabbath  6b; 
Gittin  4b  and  frequently).  This  latter  phrase  is  especially  used  where 
reference  is  made  to  investigating  questions  asked  in  another  passage 
of  the  Talmud.  Also  the  noun  of  this  verb  ^in  is  occasionally  used, 
as  pKIDtJ^I  2"n  nvin  the  investigating  questions  of  Rab  and  Samuel 
(Berachoth  30a)  «211  ""^asn  nVIH  (Succah  2Sa;  B.  Bathra  134a). 

2.     Questions  of  Astonishment. 

§  84. 

A  question  of  astonishment,  termed  nrT'DD/  expresses -wond- 
er and  surprise  at  an  unexpected  statement  or  argument  just 
heard;  as:  ^J\s  is  this  so?  i^h^  is  this  not  the  case?  "|nj;"r  i^pho 
does  this  enter  thy  mind?  i.  e.,  do  you  really  mean  to  say  this  ? 
N"13Dm  how  can  you  understand  (explain)  it  in  this  way? 
••SD  ''t<n  what  is  this!  how  can  you  say  this? 

Such  a  question  does  in  general  not  expect  an  answer, 
though  the  latter  mostly  follows  the  question. 

To  this  kind  of  questions  belongs  also  the  counter-quesiion 
in  which  a  question  asking  for  information,  instead  of  being 
answered,  is  repeated  with  surprise,  as  if  to  say,  how  can  you 
ask  such  a  strange  question,  as:  !]^:d  ?  J^iD  (Megilla  2a ; 
Sanhedrin  68b),  Ij^i:::    ?p'ijj:j  (Chullin  42b.). 

Remark.  A  peculiar  phrase  expressing  a  question  of  astonish- 
ment is  :  rh  nxp  ^t<D  nb  nxpTI  he  who  asks  (or  objects)  this,  what 
does  he  ask  (object)  here  ?  i.  e.,  why  ask  a  question  where  the 
answer  is  obvious  enough  ?  or,  why  raise  an  objection  so  easily  re- 
moved? Yoma  30b;  Yebamoth  11a;  B.  Bathra  2b.  » 


^According  to  a  tradition  mentioned  by  Joshua  b.  Joseph  Halevi 
(Halichoth  01am  p.  9a;  compare  Frankel,  Monatsschrift  1861,  p.  267), 
all  passages  of  the  Talmud  introduced  by  this  peculiar  phrase  of 
question  belong  to  the  additions  made  by  the  Saburaim. 


ASKING  AND  Answering  Questions  239 

3.     Questions  of  Objection. 
§  85. 

These  are  questions  in  which  a  point  of  difficulty,  disagree- 
ment, incongruity  or  contradiction  is  raised  against  a  state- 
ment, construction  or  argument.  The  Gemara  uses  different 
terms  for  such  questions: 

The  general  term  for  a  question  of  this  kind  is  ^''t^lp  a 
difficulty^  also  used  as  a  verb  v^p.x  to  ask  an  objecting  question, 
to  raise  a  point  of  objection,  to  show  a  difficulty.  The  question 
is  mostly  introduced  by  the  interjection:  i<rn  but  lo!  which  is 
often  prefixed  to  the  following  word,  as  ]2nm  but  lo  !  are 
we  not  taught  in  the  Mislma...?  S^'inm  is  it  not  taught  in 
the  Baraitha. ..  ?  nansm  was  it  not  said  by  an  Amora....  ? 
niDSm   but  did  you  not  say....? 

The  answer  to  such  a  question  is  termed  pnTl  a  re- 
conciliatiofi^  a  satisfactory  answer^  and  is  usually  introduced  by 
the  phrase:  ^''ll^p  S^  there  is  no  difficulty.  Where  no  satis- 
factory answer  can  be  found,  it  is  indicated  by  the  closing  term 
j^t^i^p  the  difficulty  remains,  the  point  of  objection  is  well  taken, 
f.  ex.  Moed  Katon  22b,  Maccoth  5b. 

Remark  1.  When  two  different  questions  are  raised  at  the  same 
time,  the  second  is  introduced  by  ini  and  again...  (I  further  ask...); 
f .  ex.  Berachoth  2a. 

Where  the  same  question  is  answered  by  the  Gemara  in  two  dif- 
ferent ways,  the  second  answer  is  introduced  by:  XO''N  IT'yn^N^  and  if 
you  wish,  you  may  say....;  f.  ex.  Berachoth  3a.  In  this  case  the  se- 
cond answer  has  generally  more  force  than  the  former.  Sometimes, 
however,  both  answers  are  introduced  by  this  phrase,  as  ...XD^K  n^y3''K 
...S)0^fc<  n^yTNl  you  may  either  answer,...  or  you  may  answer. ..;  f.  ex. 
Berachoth  4b.     In  this  case  both  answers  are  of  equal  force. 

The  same  question  is  often  answered  by  two  or  more  teachers,  by 
each  in  a  different  way.  In  this  case,  the  former  teacher  is  introduced 
by  'D  "ION/  and  each  of  the  following  by  IDK  'D;  f.  ex.,  Sanhedrin  33 
a.  b,  where  four  teachers  belonging  to  different  generations  (R.  Cha- 
nina,  Raba,    Rab    Papa  and  Rab  Ashe)  offer  different    answers  to  the 


240  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

same  question.  Great  ingenuity  is  in  this  respect  displayed  by  some  of 
the  teachers,  especially  by  the  rivaling  contemporaries  Abaye  and 
Kaba,  in  showing  that  a  question  already  answered  by  the  other  tea- 
cher might  also  have  been  answered  in  a  different  way;  f.  ex.,  Pesa- 
chim  5b;  Kiddushin  5a;  B.  Metzia  52a. 

Remark  2.  The  answer  to  a  question  or  an  objection  is  often  re- 
futed, and  a  new  answer  is  then  offered  either  by  the  refuter,  or  by 
another.  In  this  case,  the  new  answer  is  generally  introduced  by  N^t< 
'a  "10&5,  the  word  i^^i^  but  indicating  that  the  point  of  refutation 
against  the  former  answer  was  well  taken.  Examples:  Berachoth  30b; 
Pesachim  9b;    B.  Metzia  31a. 

Where  of  two  answers  given,  the  latter  is  refuted,  the  accept- 
ance of  the  former  is  indicated  either  by  the  phrase  01PD3  NmiinD  N7i< 
but  more  correct  is  the  answer  of  the  first  teacher  (f.  ex.  Taanith  4b; 
ChuUin  117a],  or  in  case  that  answer  had  been  given  anonymously,  by 
the  phrase  N"ip''y»  jyJlJ'ns  xnilinD  K^X  more  correct  is  as  we  answered 
at  first  (f.  ex.  Pesachim  17b;    Maccoth  2b;  B.  Metzia  3a). 

Remark  3.  In  questions  of  investigation  as  well  as  of  objection, 
the  questioner  sometimes  anticipates  an  answer  which  he  shows  to  be 
inadmissible.  Such  anticipation  (termed  in  rhetoric  prolepsis)  in 
questions  of  investigation  is  introduced  by:...  t^D^i^^N  is  it  to  say...?  f. 
ex.  Berachoth  9b;  Kiddushin  29a;  Gittin  9a.  In  questions  of  objec- 
tion it  is  introduced  by:...t«rD^n  ""Dl  and  if  you  will  say  (answer)...,  f.  ex. 
Sanhedrin  6a;  Kiddushin  3b;  Gittin  3b.  On  the  other  hand,  where  in 
giving  an  answer  or  explanation,  an  objection  is  anticipated  which  is 
to  be  removed,  it  is  introduced  by  iDNn  DN1  (abbr.  n"&<1)  but  if  you 
will   say  (object)....  f.   ex.   Succah    16b  ;  Gittin  lib;  B.   Metzia  10a  : 

Some  Special  Kinds  of  Objection. 
§  86. 

The  terms  «*»nin  and  sn^l'^n  are  but  species  of  the  general 
term  i^'^^*\p  a  question  of  objection. 

a.  Where  the  objection  consists  in  raising  a  point  of  con- 
tradiction between  two  statements  of  equal  authority,  as 
between  two  passages  of  Scriptures  or  between  passages  of  the 


Asking  and  Answering  Questions.  241 

Mishna  and  the  Baraitha,  it  is  termed  s-'Din  (of  the  verb  •'ni 
to  cast,  to  throw  against,  to  bring  in  opposition)  setting 
authority  against  authority,  bringing  authorities  in  opposition 
to  each  other.  Such  a  question  of  objection  or  contradiction 
is  generally  introduced  by  the  phrase  :  ...''Dn  ^JI^S  a  certain 
teacher  asked  the  following  question  of  contradiction  between 
two  passages....;  or  by  :  ...>nmni  I  raise  against  this  the  ques- 
tion of  a  conflict  of  authorities,  i.  e.,  I  find  this  Mishna  to  be 
in  conflict  with  the  following  passage  in  an  other  Mishna  or  in 
a  Baraitha....  Omitting  this  introductory  phrase,  such  a 
question  is  often  set  forth  simply  by  :  ...|3nm  but  are  we  not 
taught  in  (another)  Mishna...?  ^'•inm  are  we  not  taught  in 
a  Braitha...?  (See  above  §  49) 

b.  s^naiTl  (the  Aramaic  form  of  the  Hebrew  word  n^ltyn 
an  answer,  gainsaying,  objection,  refutation)  signifies  an  ob- 
jection raised  against  an  Amora  as  being  in  conflict  with  the 
superior  authority  of  a  statement  in  a  Mishna  or  Baraitha.  It 
is  generally  introduced  by  •'il^S  DTlD  a  certain  teacher  raised 
the  following  objection  from  a  higher  authority...;  or  n''3*'ri''S 
he  objected  to  him  from  a  higher  authority  ;  or  :  ^Tn'^tl)  they 
(the  teachers  of  the  Academy)  raised  the  following  objection 
(See  above  §  6t) 

The  answer  to  such  a  point  of  objection  is  termed  S'^li'^tt^ 
a  difference  or  distinction^  in  as  much  as  it  mostly  attempts  to 
remove  the  contradiction  by  showing  that  the  two  statements, 
seemingly  in  conflict  with  each  other,  actually  refer  to  dilferent 
cases  or  circumstances.  The  answer  is  generally  introduced 
by  :  ...S^n  "'iSlS^  here  is  a  different  case,  or  by  :  ....nr.n  ....  jSO 
here...  there...,  or  ....t<n  ....Sn  in  this  case...,  but  in  the  other 
case....,  or  by:  ....jrpDj;  ''SD2  «::n  here  we  treat  of  the 
special    case    that 

Remark  1.  These  distinctions  for  the  purpose  of  removing  a 
contradiction  are  often  very  strained,  and  are  in  this  case  sometimes 
characterized  by  the  Talmud  itself  as  ^'^''r\^  ^""^y^  a  forced  or 
strained     answer,    f.  ex.  :  B.   Kamma  48a.  ;  106a.  ;  Kethuboth     42b. 


242  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

Eemark  2.  The  answer  to  an  objection  is  also  termed  Xpll^S  (from 
p")Q  to  redeem,  to  rescue,  to  unload  ;  hence,  to  free  one  from  the  burden 
of  an  objection)  ;  as  "»"'a5<T  Xp'»l"'D  B.  Kamma  14a.  More  frequently 
used  is  the  verb,  as  rf?  p"l3tD  Nini  vh  l^fllD  t^lH  he  asked  a  question 
of  objection,  and  he  answered  it,  Kiddushin  44b;  Gittin  53a.  B.  Kamma 
43b.  ;  or  n^  nJ^pTSDI  ""i?  "^^pJ^  he  asked  me  questions  of  objection, 
and  I  answered  them,  B.  Metzia  84a. 

The  Dilemma. 
§   8t 

Objections  are  sometimes  set  forth  in  the  form  of  a  dilem- 
ma (termed  ■!t^*2i  nOD),  presenting  two  or  more  alternatives 
of  a  case  or  an  opinion,  and  showing  it  to  be  equally  objection- 
able whichev^er  alternative   we  may  choose,  as : 

a.  (S'^ir^p)  ...''S'l  (S"'trp)  ...\S  7JSi  nn  ^^al  is  thy  wishi 
i.  e.,  which  alternative  do  you  choose  ?  //"....  (then  my  objectiou 
is  :  ....)  and  if,.,,   (then  my  objection  is  : ....).' 

Examples  :    Sabbath  46a;  B.  Kamma  38a;   Chullin  12a. 

b.  (S'^typ)  ....\S1  (S'^trp)  -...\S  ^Ol  '•D^n  how  shall  we 
imagine  this  case  t  if..,,  (then  my  objection  is....)  and  if,,,. 
(then   I  have    to  object....). 

Examples  :  Kethuboth  72a  ;  B.  Metzia  21a  ;  B.  Bathra  YSb. 

C '»J<T     .,./S   |J''pDy    ""^D^    of  what  circu7nstance   do  we. 

treat  here  ?   //....    (objection),    and  if....    (objection). 
Examples:  Sabbath  30a,  Gittin  3'7b,  B.  Metzia  12b. 

d ''ST     ...."'S    *i;2Dp    ^SD     what  is     his    opinion  ?  If  he 

holds   that....    (then    I  object....),   and  if  he  holds....   (I  also 
object....). 

Examples:     Berachoth  3a;  Sanhedrin  2b;   Kiddushin  6b. 
The  answer  to  a  dilemma  either  shows  a  middle  ground  between 
the  two  alternatives,  or  defends  one  of  the  alternatives  against 
the  objection  made  to  it.  In  the  first   case,  it  is  introduced  by 


*  The  phrase  of  '^t^'£J  HD  is  also  used  in  introducing  an  argument 
in  defense,  proving  that  a  decision  or  opinion  is  equally  correct  which- 
ever of  the  two  alternatives  we  may  choose.  Examples:  Betza  10b. 
Gittin  43b;  B.  Metzia  6b. 


Asking  and  Answering  Questions.  243 

the  phrase  ...i  SD"""!:;  S^  it  is  not  necessary  so  (namely  to 
choose  just  one  of  the  presented  alternatives),  for.... (a  third  al- 
ternative is  imaginable  to  which  none  of  your  objections  ap- 
plies). In  the  second  case,  the  answer  is  generally  introduced 
by  the  word  n^iy^  which  in  this  connection  stands  for  Q^l^^ 
^b  S!2^S  still  I  maintain  (one  of  the  alternatives  with  some  mo- 
difications). 

Kejoinder. 
§88. 

Where  the  answer  to  an  objection  or  to  a  refutation  is 
found  to  be  insufficient,  the  weak  points  thereof  are  set  forth 
in  a  rejoinder.   The  phrases  mostly  used  in  such  a  rejoinder  are: 

a C]1D  D,*D  (literally:  the  end  of  the  end...)    anyhow^  at 

all  events^  that  is,  however  extreme  my  concession  to  the  suppo- 
sition of  your  answer  may]  G;  my  former  objection  still  remains... 

Examples:     Megilla  3a;    Gittin  24a;  B.  Metzia  16a. 

b.  Where  the  rejoinder  goes  to  demonstrate  that  the 
answer  does  not  cover  all  cases  the  following  phrase  is  used: 

"ID^'d''  «::\S  \SD  ....a  ....3  nrn  you  may  be  right...  (i.  e., 
your  defense  is  acceptable  concerning  one  case),  but  concer- 
ning...  (that  other  case  of....)  what  have  you  to  say? 

Examples:  Pesachim  11a;    Gittin  4b;    B.  Metzia  3a. 

c.  Where  the  answer  is  found  to  be  based  only  on  a  dis- 
puted principle,  the  rejoinder  is  phrased; 

That  IS  all  right  according  to  him  who  holds..., but  accord- 
ing to  him  who  holds....  (the  opposite  opinion),  what  is  there  to 
say?     Examples:  Berachoth  12a;    Yoma  3a;  Sanhedrin  3a. 

4.     Qqestions  of  Problems. 

§  89. 

Problem  is  a  question  pro[)osed  for  solution  concerning  a 
matter  dilficult  of  settlement.  The  pages  of  the  Talmud  are 
full  of  such  questions.  The  doubt  involved  in  those  questions 
concern  there   either  the  correct  reading,    or  the  proper  con- 


244  Terminology  and  Methodology 

struction  and  meaning  of  the  Mishna,  or  the  decision  of  a  case 
not  provided  for  in  the  Mishna. 

Such  questions  are  termed  nT'^j  problems,  questions  of 
doubt,  and  are  generally  introduced  by  ''ii^s  ^'^2  a  certain  tea- 
cher asked  the  following  difficult  question,  he  propounded  a 
problem  for  solution,  or  ^Jl^St:  i^)b^  ^]^z  A  asked  B  to  solve 
the  following  question  ;  or  when  such  a  question  was  asked 
anonymously  in  a  school,  it  is  introduced  by:  ^rih  i<**]^2*'i^  the 
following  problem  was  proposed  by  them  (i.  e.  by  the  members 
of  the   academy). 

The  point  of  the  question  is  generally  followed  by  the 
interrogative  inD  how  is  it  ?  The  two  sides  of  the  question 
are  usually  set   forth   by  :    ....SD^I    IS     ....p"''nDS   "'D    shall 

we   say....    or   perhaps Sometimes,    however,    the  phrase 

P'^nDS   ''D  is   omitted,  and   must  be  supplied. 

Examples  of  problems :  1.  Concerning  the  proper 
reading  or  construction  of  the  Mishna :  Sabbath  36b  j 
Yoma   41b ;   B.    Kamma    19a. 

2  Concerning  the  source  or  reason  of  a   law : 
Taanith   2b;   Aboda  Zara  6a;    Gittin  45a. 

3  Concerning   cases  not  provided  for  in  the  Mishna  : 
Sabbath  3a  Pesachim  4b  Kiddushin   7b;     B.   Bathra  5b. 

Remark.  Where  the  propounded  problem  appears  to  be  merely 
theoretical,  the  practical  consequence  of  its  solution  is  investigated 
by  the  query :  T]^''J2  KpSJ  ''^^D^  for  what  case  will  it  be  of 
consequence  ?    Examples  :    Pesachim  4a;    B.  Kamma  24a;  Gittin  36b. 

Solution  of    the  Problem. 
§    90 

The  solution  of  a  problem  (the  verb  is  taii^S)  13 
introduced  by  the  phrase  j;d*^  t<r  (abbr.  tS^"n)  come  and 
hear.  When  rejected,  another  solution  introduced  by  the  same 
phrase  is  generally  attempted.  The  final  acceptance  of  a 
solution  is  indicated  by  the  closing  phrase  HTD  y^^  hear 
it  therefrom,  1.  e.,  this  settles  the  question,  this  is  the 
correct    solution. 


Asking  and  Answering  Questions  245 

Where  no  solution  is  found,  it  is  indicated  by  the  term 
IpTl  (=D1p^n)  it  stands,  i.  e.,  the  question  remains  unsolved. 

Where  the  questioner  himself  finds  a  solution,  the  phrase 
is  :  ntOtys  "l"rn  "'J^^l  "iri2  after  having  propounded  this 
question,  he  again  solved  it.  Examples  :  Sabbath  4b;  Kid- 
dushin   9b;    Sanhedrin    10a. 

If  out  of  several  problems  only  one  can  be  solved,  the 
solution  is  introduced  by  the  phrase  sin  SriD  ISIti^S  you 
may  solve,  at  least,  one  of  them :  f.  ex.  B.  Metzia  25a; 
Gittin  44a. 

A  Series  of  Problems  Linked  together. 

§     91 

Sometimes,  a  series  of  problems  concerning  imaginary 
cases  of  a  certain  law  are  set  forth  by  a  teacher,  and  so 
arranged  that  if  one  of  them  be  solved,  the  following  one 
would  still  remain  doubtful.  Each  problem,  except  the  first 
one,  is  then  generally  introduced  by  the  phrase... nDl'?  i^^J^n  DST 
and  if  you  should  be  able  to  say....  (to  solve  it  in  one  way) 
1  still  ask...  (the  following  case). 

Examples  :  Pesachim  10b;  Kiddushin  Yb;  Kethuboth  2a; 
B.    Metzia  21a;  24a. 

Remark.  Some  of  the  Babylonian  teachers,  especially  Raba,  R. 
Jirmiah,  Rab  Papa,  were  noted  for  having  indulged  in  propounding 
such  problems  concerning  imaginary  cases  in  order  to  display  their 
ingenuity.  R.  Jirmiah  was  at  a  certain  occasion  even  expelled  from  the 
academy  for  having  troubled  his  colleagues  by  his  imaginary  and  trif- 
ling problems  (B.  Bathra  23b].  Of  Raba  and  some  other  teachers  it  is 
expressly  stated  that  they  occasionally  propounded  such  problems, 
merely  for  the  purpose  of  examining  the  ability  and  acuteness  of  their 
pupils;  Erubin  51a;  Menachoth  91b;  Chullin  133a. 

Questions  laid  before  higher  Authorities  for  Decision. 

§92. 
Different  from  the  questions  of  problem  just  spoken  of  are 


246  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

those  questions  which  were  directed  to  a  higher  authority, 
either  to  a  celebrated  teacher  or  to  an  academy,  especially  of 
Palestine,  to  consider  a%d  tlecldo  iipoi!i  ji  difficulty  or  a  dis- 
pute. Such  questions  are  usually  introduced  by  the  phrase  : 
....IJan  ^}1^b'>  ''^I^S^  n*^^  in^ir  they  sent   to  a  certain  teacher 

(asking.):  may   our  teacher  instruct  us  concerniiig. The 

answer  is  then  introduced  by  :  .,.,in^  T]b'^  he  sent  to  them 
(the   answer).... 

Examples  :    Sanhedrin  8a;   B.  Kamma  27b;  Gittin  66b. 

Remark.  Alao  the  phrase  DHD  Ifl^k^  they  sent  from  there  fi.  e. 
from  Palestine  to  Babylon)  means,  they  sent  an  answer  to  a  question 
directed  to   them;  f.  ex.,  Betza  4b;  Gittin  20a;  Sanhedrin  ITbw 


CHAPTER  X. 

B.     ARGUMENTATION. 

1.    Terms  and  Phrases  Introducing  an  Argument. 

§93 

An  argument,  that  is.  the  reason  offered  to  prove  or  dis- 
prove any  matter  of  question,  is  termed  □j;!^  (the  reason). 

In  the  Talmudic  discussion,  arguments  are  mostly  intro- 
duced by  one  of  the  following  phrases  : 

a.  SD  yi^  •'i^D  what  is  the  reason?  Berachoth  3b,  a.  elsewhere. 

b.  yo*^  sn  come  and  hear,  i.  e.,  you  may  derive  it  from 
the  following. . . ;  Berachoth  2b,  a.  elsewhere. 

c  yin  you  may  know  (infer)  it  from  the  following.  Berachoth 
15a;  B.  Metzia   5b,   a.  elsewhere. 

d.  nb  sn::^  t<iD  whence  do  I  maintain  this  ?on  what  do  I 
base  my  opinion  ?  Berachoth  25a;   Sabbath  lib,  a.  elsewhere. 

e.  S"iD"'n  SJtSI  and  whence  may  you  say  (prove)  that....? 
Sabbath  23a;  B.   Metzia  11a. 

f.  JiS  "'Tni  let  us  see  (into  the  subject),  let  us  argue  on  the 
subject.  Berachoth  27a;  B.  Kamma51b;  B.  Metzia  8b. 

g.  ^<"12^^D  it  is  reasonable,  it  is  in  accordance  with  com- 
mon sense.   Berachoth  2b;  Sabbath  25a;  Kiddushin  5a. 

h.  S12riD!:D  ^^2  ''Dn  so  it  is  also  reasonable;  this  may  be 
proved  by  the  following  reasoning.  Yoma  16a;  B.  Kamma  26a; 
B.  Metzia   10a. 

i.  "'Di  Sp^l  it  is  also  proved  by  a  conclusion.  Berachoth 
26a,   a.  elsewhere. 

The  last  mentioned  phrase  is  especially  used  where  the 
argument  is  based  on  a  conclusion  drawn  from  the  wording 
of  a  passage. 


248  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

2.  Classification  of  Arguments. 
§  94 
Arguments  are  either  direct  or  indirect.  In  the  first  case, 
the  grounds  or  reasons  are  laid  down,  and  the  correctness  of 
the  proposition  to  be  proved  is  inferred  from  them.  In  the 
second  case,  the  thesis  is  not  proved  immediately,  but  by 
showing  the  falsehood  of  its  contradictory. 

In  the  Talmud,  the  arguments  mostly  used  in  direct  as 
well  as  indirect  reasoning,  are  the  following : 

a.  The  argument  from  common  sense. 

b.  The  argument  from  authority. 

c.  The  argument  from  construction  and  implication. 

d.  The  argument  from  analogy. 

e.  The  argument  a  fortiori. 

a.  Argument  from  Common  Sense. 
§    95 

A  common  sense  argument  is  termed  S^l^D,  so  in  the 
phrases:  t<in  S*13D  it  is  a  common  sense  reasoning;  Pesachim 
21b;  Sanhedrin  15a,  B.  Metzia  27b.  S"2S1  S12D  S*D"'t<  Ts'^^l  '♦S 
i<*^p  if  you  wish,  I  refer  to  common  sense,  and  if  you  wish, 
I  refer  to  a  biblical  passage;  Berachoth  4b,  Yebamoth  39b, 
Kiddushin  85  a. 

Common  sense  reasons  are  generally  introduced  by  the 
conjunctives:  ,...«rn  for  behold...,  ....i  h'^'^'\X\  because,  p'lD 
,„,"r  since,  ,...^S^  because,  .,.,T  Dlt^D  on  account  of,  •»jsd 
,,..ty  for...,  because.... 

b.    Argument  from  Authority. 

§  96. 
An  argument  from  authority,  termed  rT'SI  the  proof, 
the  evidence,  is  that  which  appeals  to  the  authority  of  the 
Bible  (snp  ^Dt<1  lor  Scripture  says;  ^TD"!  for  it  is  written; 
*1DSJ^  for  it  is  said),  or  to  the  authority  of  the  Mishna  (Jim 
for  it  is  taught  in  the  Mishna),  or  to  that  of  the  Baraitha 
(^''^m;  "i"m),  or  to  the  accepted  teaching  of  an  Amora  (1D«T 


Argumentation.  249 

*'l^h^),  or  to  an  accepted  tradition  (^n''D:i  we  have  learned  by 
tradition,  Berachoth  28a,  Succah  5b;  p^t^p:  we  have  received 
it  by  tradition,  Erubin  5a,  Gittin  32b,  Maccoth  10b),  or  to 
a  settled  rule  and  established  principle  of  law  (]^  t<!::"'''pT  for 
it  is  established  among  us,  it  is  a  generally  accepted  opinion 
or  maxim,  Yebamoth  6a,  Gittin  28b;  jmoST  for  we  generally 
say,  hold  the  opinion,  Yebamoth  3b,  B.  Metzia  25b). 

The  Talmud  being  occupied  chiefly  with  questions  of  law, 
arguments  from  authority  are  there  of  supreme  importance. 

The  inference  from  the  cited  authority  is  generally  intro- 
duced by  s*D^t<  hence,  consequently  (Pesachim  2a-3a),  or  by 
^^2D  in  this  is  implied,  from  this  follows,  or  by  HTD  ]^^^ 
hear  from  this,   i.  e.   you  may  infer  herefrom.... 

Remark  1.  The  plirase  n"':"'D  V^^  is  also  used  to  express  the  final  ap- 
proval of  the  preceding  argument,  and  is  then  to  be  translated  by:  It 
follows  therefrom  the  argument  is  accepted;  Pesachim  8a  a.  elsewhere. 
Remark  2.  Where  the  argument  from  authority  is  based  merely 
on  the  supposition  of  a  certain  interpretation  of  the  quoted  passage 
or  on  a  supposed  circumstance  to  which  it  refers,  that  supposition 
is  introduced  by  ....IN^  ^ND  is  it  not  (to  be  supposed)  that....? 
In  answering  such  an  argument,  the  opponent  generally  denies 
that  supposition  by  ...s^  it  is  not  so,  but...  ;  f.  ex.,  Pesachim  16b; 
Sanhedrin  24b;  B.  Kamma   15b. 

c.    Argument  from  a  Close  Construction  of  a  Passage. 

§    97. 

This  is  an  argument  which  draws  conclusions  from  a 
careful  consideration  of  the  words  in  which  a  law  is  framed. 
Such  an  argument  is  termed  SpVT  (from  the  verb  p^1  to 
examine  minutely,  to  consider  a  thing  carefully),  and  is  most- 
ly introduced  by  the  phrase:  .... ''jr.pl  ''D:  spn  it  is  also 
proved  by  a  conclusion  from  the  expression  used  in  this  Mishna 
or  Baraitha. 

Examples:  Succah  3a;  Kiddushin  3a;  Shebuoth  29b. 
Remark.     Hereto  belongs  also  that  argument  in  which  conclusions 


250  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

are  drawn  from  a  positive  statement  to  the  negative,  and  vice  versa, 
by  emphasizing  either  the  subject  or  the  predicate  or  the  modification 
in  the  clause  of  a  law  under  consideration.  The  phrase  used  in  such 
conclusions  is  either:  ,...j^n  ....T  HJDV^  the  reason  (the  force,  stress) 
of  this  law  is  in  the  expressly  stated  case  of....  but....  (in  the  opposite 
case,  the  decision  of  the  law  is  the  reverse);  f.  ex.,  Kiddushin  5b; 
B.  Kamma  48b;  B.  Meztia  25a.  Sometimes  the  phrase  is:  ^2i<,  pK... 
K^J...  strictly  in  this  case  yes,  but... (other wise)  not;  f.  ex.,  Yoma 
85b;  B.   Metzia  30a;   34a. 

Such  arguments  resting  merely  on  the  emphasis  of  an  expression 
are  often  very  arbitrary  and  fallacious,  and  are  in  this  case  prompt- 
ly refuted   in  the  Talmud. 

d.    Arguments  from  Analogy. 

§     98. 

An  argument  from  analogy,  termed  tJ^p^n  or  i^^^*n,  is  that 
which  infers  from  the  similarity  of  two  cases  that,  what  has 
been  decided  in  the  one,  applies  also  in  the  other. 

Such  arguments  are  introduced  by  one  of  the  fol- 
lowing phrases: 

a 1  S^'DH  in  similarity  with  the   case  of...;  Kiddushin 

12a;  B.  Bathra    28b. 

b sn^  «^«   i^^OI  S^  Hn   this  is  rather  like  that  other 

case  of...;  Sabbath  12a;  Kiddushin   7a;  B.  Metzia  30a. 

c ''3:1  |n3*2^S"r3  as  we  find  concerning...;  Berachoth  20b. 

d i<  mm  *'V0  something  which  is  found   concerning..., 

i.  e.,  just  as  in  the  case  of...;  Sabbath  6a;  Kiddushin  4a; 
Gittin   8b. 

Also  the  phrase:  (S>in)  ]:n  i<b  ''D  are  we  not  taught  in  the 
Mishna  (or  Baraitha)  ?  mostly  introduces  an  argument  from 
analogy;  Pesachim  7a,  9a;  Kiddushin  7a. 

The  application  of  the  analogous  case  to  the  case  under 
consideration  is  generally  introduced  by  ''DJ  iOn  ...DHn  ''i^D 
as  there...  so  here,  too. 


Argumentation.  251 

e.     Argument  a  Fortiori. 
§  99. 

The  argument  a  fortiori^  termed  nDim  ^p,  is  a  kind  of 
argument  from  analogy,  and  consists  in  proving  that  a  thing 
being  true  in  one  case  is  more  evidently  so  in  another  in  which 
the  circumstances  are  more  favorable. 

In  regard  to  Biblical  interpretation,  this  argument  was 
treated  in  Part  II  of  this  book  as  the  first  rule  of  the  Tal- 
mudical  Hermeneutics.  Its  application  in  the  discussions  of 
the  Gemara  is  less  artificial  than  there.  The  phraseology  used 
in  setting  forth  this  argument  is: 

a.  «''j;;d  «Dn  ....n-iDS  ....onn  (hdi)  sntr^n  now,  (since) 

there...  (in  that  other  case  of...)  you  say....,  could  it  here  be 
questioned  ? 

Examples:  Gittin  15b;  B.  Bathra  4a;  Maccoth  6b. 

b.  p*^  ^:)  s^  «:Dn  ....nnn  hot  sn*^n  now,  if  there...., 

how  much  the  more  (or  the  less)  here. 

Examples:    Yoma  2b,  B.  Metzia  2b;  Yebamoth  32a. 
Remark.    In  the  Agadic  passages  of  the  Talmud,    the  final  con- 
clusion of  such  an  argument  is  generally  expressed    by  HDD  nriN  Jjy 
\\'Q'2\\  f.  ex.   Gittin    35a;  Nedarim  10b;    Maccoth    24a. 

3.    Indirect    Argumentation. 
§     100. 

The  mode  of  proceeding  in  indirect  argumentation  is  to 
assume  the  denial  of  the  point  in  question  or  a  hypothesis 
which  is  the  contradictory  of  the  proposition  to  be  proved,  and 
then  to  show  that  such  a  denial  or  hypothesis  involves  some 
false  principle,  or  leads  to  consequences  that  are  manifestly  ab- 
surd. The  assumed  contradictory  thus  shown  to  be  false,  the 
original  proposition  must  consequently  be  true. 

This  method  is  very  frequently  applied  in  the  Talmudic 
discussion.  The  phrases  used  in  indirect  argumentation  are: 

a.     (S^*^p)...."'3n  s:2\n  s'?  \sn  for  if  you  do  not  say  so  (i.  e. 
if  you  deny  my  proposition),  the  diflSculty  or  the  objection  is.... 


262  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

Examples:  Berachoth  26b;  Yoma  15a;  B.  Metzia  5b. 

b.  (S^irp)....nnD«  ""^T  for  if  you  say...  (the  contrary),  then... 
(objection). 

Examples:  Berachoth  2b;  Yoma  24b;  Gittin  35b;  B. 
Metzia  28b. 

c.  («''trp)....inj;-r  t^pbo  •'SI  for  if  it  should  enter  your  mind, 
(i.  e.,  if  you  should  assume  the  contrary...),  then...  (it  will 
lead  to  the  folfowing  objectionable  consequence). 

Examples:  Berachoth  13a;  Sanhedrin  6a;  B.  Metzia  5b. 

Indirect  arguments  are  often  introduced  by  the  phrase 
S^ZHDD  it  is  proved  by  the  following  reasoning...  or  ^dj  '«:Dn 
N"l3nDD   it  may  thus  also  be  proved  by  reasoning 

The  conclusion  from  an  indirect  argument  is  generally  ex- 
pressed by  ikS  i<^«  is  it  then  not...?  or  riTD  pDty  M^b  «^« 
is  it  then  not  to  be  concluded  herefrom...  (the  correctness  of 
the  proposition  which  was  to  be  proved)?  In  direct  arguments, 
the  phrase  is  simply:  n"'J''D  ^Dli^. 

Remark.  Arguments  introduced  by  X"l3nDD  ^DJ  ^3n  or  by  xp^T 
^D2  are  generally  regarded  conclusive.  As  to  the  exceptions,  see  To- 
saphoth  Yoma  84a,  s.  v.  )0"jn  and  Tosaphoth  Sebachim  13a  and 
Chullin67b,  s.  v.  •»DJ  Kpn. 

4.     Direct  and  Indirect  Arguments  Combined. 
§    101. 

To  support  a  proposition  against  the  contrary  view  of  an 
opponent,  the  Talmud  often  uses  a  combination  of  direct  and 
indirect  arguments,  by  referring  to  an  authority,  and  showing 
it  to  be  in  harmony  with  the  proposition  and  in  disharmony 
with  the  contradictory.  The  phrases  used  in  such  argument- 
ations are: 

a.    (TSty)  ....«D^tr3  nnD«  ••«    (=nnD«  ••«  i<nb^2) 
(s'^tt'p)    nnD«  •'«  «^« 

it  is  well,  if  you  say...  (if  you  accept  my  proposition),  then  every 
thing  is  all  right;  but  if  you  say...  (the  contradictory),  then... 
(you  meet  some  difficulty). 


Argumentation.  253 

Examples:     Berachoth  26b;  Sabbath  23a;  B.  Metzia   3a. 

b.  or  NT  or)   Tsr;    •'T-i^  SD^u:*:: 

it  is  well   accordiDg  to   my  view....;   but   according  to  your 
view...  (there  is  a  difficulty). 

Examples:  Yoma  4a;  Pesachim  46b;  Moed  Katon  2b. 

c.  Or\"i)  Tsty    ....nosn  ;«D^  «n^*^n 

it  is  well  according  to  him  who  holds....;  but  according  to  him 
who  holds.... (the  contrary  view).... (there  is  the  diffiiculty). 
Examples:  Berachoth  41a;  Yoma  40a;  B.   Kamma  22a. 


CHAPTER  XL 

REFUTATION. 

Definition  and  Terms. 
§  102. 

A  refutation  consists  either  in  proving  that  a  given  pro- 
position is  false,  or  in  overthrowing  the  arguments  by  which 
it  has  been  supported.  In  the  first  case,  it  is  termed  :  t<n21^n 
(the  Aramaic  word  for  the  Hebrew  ^2ru^*n  an  answer,  gainsay- 
ing, refutation),  and  in  the  second  case:  SDn^iS  (from  the  verb 
niS  to  break  into  pieces,  to  crumble;  hence,  to  destroy,  to  in- 
validate), or:  rT'm  (from  the  verb  >rn  to  push  aside,  to  over- 
throw to  supersede). 

A.     The  Refutation  of  a  Proposition. 
§103. 

The  strongest  argument  against  a  proposition  advanced 
by  an  Amora  is  to  show  that  it  conflicts  with  the  authoritative 
decision  laid  down  in  a  Mishna  or  a  Baraitha.  Such  a  refuta- 
tion is  generally  introduced  by:  n'^zn''^,  or  ijl^S  ^''HD,  or 
•'i'^n'^D;   see  above  §  86b. 

A  proposition  is  refuted  indirectly  by  showing  that,  assum- 
ing it  to  be  true,  a  certain  passage  of  a  Mishna  or  Baraitha 
bearing  on  that  subject  ought  to  have  been  expressed  differently 
or  could  not  well  be  explained.  The  phrases  mostly  used  in 
such  negative  argumentation  after  quoting  such  a  passage  are: 

a.  (S^itr'p)  {n^h  "•ya'^t:)  nnDS  ''Sl  now,  if  you  say.,  (main- 
tain your  proposition),  then...  (we  meet  with  a  difficulty). 

Examples:  Gittin  53a;  Kiddushin  32a;  B.  Metzia  10a. 

b.  {i<^^p)  ...^nyi  i^pbo  \ST  now,  if  you  assume...  (your 
proposition  to  be  true),  then... 

Examples:  Sabbath  Tb;  Betza  9b;  B.  Metzia  10b. 

c.  (S'»*^p)  ...SH'^S  DSVnow,  ifitwereso..  (as  you  main- 
tain), then.... 

Examples:  R.  Hashana  3b;  Pesachim  25a,  Betza  18a. 


Refutation.  256 

Remark.  A  proposition  is  also  refuted  indirectly  by  proving  the 
truth  of  its  contradictory.  The  confirmation  of  one  of  two  antagonis- 
tic opinions  is  thus  the  virtual  refutation  of  the  other,  and  vice  versa. 
Hence  the  Talmudic  phrases:  (3)  ^JI^Dl  Nnnvm  (Xj  ^J^i?^'?  n^b  T^DD 
this  Mishna  is  a  support  (confirmation)  of  the  opinion  of  A,  and  a 
refutation  of  the  (opposite)  opinion  of  B  ;  f .  ex,  Yebamoth  53a,  and: 
(n)  ^:i^2i?  "•yvob  (X)  '2)%^  yno  he  refuted  A  in  support  of  B;  f. 
ex.,  Yoma  42b;  B.  Bathra  45b;  Chullin  10a;  Zebachim   10a. 

B.     Refutation  of  Arguments. 
§  104. 

Such  refutations  are  very  often  introduced  by  the  phrase: 
'*^^b^  nh  i:\'^pr\:2  a  certain  teacher  asked  a  strong  question 
against  this  (argument)....;  (f.  ex.,  Sabbath  4a;  R.  Hashana 
13a;  Sanhedrin  4a;  Maccoth  3a).  Occasionally,  it  is  introduced 
by:  ...'S  "[''13  a  certain  teacher  refuted  tliis  argument  (f.  ex. 
Kiddushin  13a;  Yebamoth  24a;  Shebuoth  41b),  or...'3  n^  DTJQ 
a  certain  teacher  ridiculed  this  argument,  in  showing  its  ab- 
surdity (Sabbath  62b:  Kidd.  Tib;  Sanhedrin  3b;  Aboda  Zara 
35a;  Zebachim  12a).' 


M  The  term  S)''pnD  (from  F)pn  to  oveiyower,  to  attack;  hence, 
to  overthrow,  to  confute  an  argument,)  is  mostly  used  only  in  re- 
ference to  refuting  questions  asked  by  the  later  Amoraim  from  the 
time  of  Rabba  and  Rab  Joseph,  though  in  Temura  7a  it  is  exceptionally 
applied  to  a  question  raised  by  Resh  Lakisli. 

•^IS  meaning,  literally,  to  break  into  ineccs,  to  crumble;  hence, 
to  invalidate  an  argument,  to  refute,  is  by  the  earlier  Amoraim 
used  as  a  term  of  refuting  especially  a  Kal  vechomer  or  a  Binyan  Ah 
(in  the  phrase -|-id>d^  XD'i<,  and  as  a  noun  XDI-D).  As  a  term  of  refu- 
ting any  argument  it  is  mostly  used  by  Rab  Acha.  The  Talmud  com- 
mentators Rashi  and  Tosaphoth  often  use  the  verb  "]-i2  in  the  general 
sense,  to  ask  a  question. 

The  term  r]njr)  is  mostly  used  by  R.  Abuha.  and  only  on<'e  by  R. 
Jirmija  and  once  by  R.  Chanina.  — Tosaphotli  Yebamoth  2b.  s.  v.  D^tJ'D 
calls  attention  to  the  circumstance  that  some  of  the  Amoraim  used 
their  own  peculiar  terms  in  setting  forth  a  quk-stion.  See  KohuVs 
Arucli  Com  pie  turn  s.  v.  Cji^. 


256  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

The  procedure  of  refuting  a  particular  argument  varies 
with  the  nature  of  the  latter,  as  will  be  shown  in  the  following 
paragraphs. 

§105. 

1.  An  argument  from  com??ion  sense  (see  above  §  95)  is 
overthrown  by  showing  that  good  common  sense  rather  sides 
with  the  opposite  view. 

The  phrase  used  in  such  counter-argument  is :  n2"ns 
(also  spelled  i<3^"r^<)  on  the  contrary^  or  more  emphatically  : 
J<n2nDD  S2D''i<  T\2m'^  on  the  contrary,  the  reverse  is  more 
reasonable. 

Examples:  Sabbath  3b;  Pesachim  28a;  Gittin  23b. 
Eemark  1.  The  term  nnmx  or  t^miX  (a  contraction  of  the 
words  nm  n  by»  literally,  on  that  which  is  greater  or  stronger,  i.  e., 
on  the  contrary  side  is  a  stronger  argument)  must  not  be  confoun- 
ded with  the  words  nmj^  and  N3n5<  meaning  against  the  view 
of  Rabba  or  of  Raba,  in  the  phrases  :  nailj^  nan  t^^iJ'p  Gittin  27a, 
and  NnmN  «n"n  N^SJ'p  B.  Bathra  30a. 

Remark  2.  A  similar  meaning  as  the  term  n3"llX  on  the  contra- 
ry, is  expressed  by  the  phrase  n"^  ''D^D>  literally:  where  does  this  turn? 
i.  e.,  on  the  contrary,  the  opposite  view  is  more  reasonable;  f.  ex.  Pe- 
sachim 5b;  B.  Metzia  58b. 

§  106. 

2.  An  argument  from  authority^  (see  above  §  96)  is  defeat- 
ed in  different  ways: 

a.  By  showing  that  the  whole  argument  is  based  on  a 
misapprehension  of  the  passage  referred  to.  In  demonstrating 
this,  either  of  the  following  phrases  is  used: 

fc^n^Dm  how  do  you  reason?  How  can  you  understand  that 
passage  in  this  way? 

Examples:   Pesachim  26a;  Yebamoth  15a,  B.  Kamma  14:a. 

S^...nn2D  '•D  do  you  think..., do  you  understand  the  pas- 
sage in  this  way  ?  It  is  not  so,   but.... 

Examples:   Pesachim  29a;    Kiddushin  7a,    B.  Metzia  32b. 

b.  By  showing  that   the  authority  referred   to  does  not 


Refutation.  257 

necessarily  concern  the  case  under  consideration.  This  is 
phrased  either:  (SiDH  or)  nnn  ''iSt:^  there  (or,  here)  the  case 
is  different,  for.... 

Examples:  Pesachim  5a;   Shebuoth  15a;  B.  Metzia  10a. 

Or:  ...jrpDy ''SD3  SDH  here  we  treat  of  the  special  case 
of... 

Examples;   Gittin  12a;  B.  KammaSa;   B.  Metzia  10b. 

c.  By  showing  that  the  passage  referred  to  is  not  autho- 
ritative, as  it  only  expresses  the  individual  opinion  of  one 
Mishna  Teacher,  disputed  by  another  authority. 

Sjn  '•sn  ''S  nD«T  Sin  he  holds  it  with  that  other  teacher 
...;f.  ex.,  Maccoth  10b;  12a. 

Or:  «''n...''il^S  •'3D  «n  whose  opinion  is  here  accepted  ? 
that  of....;  f.ex..  Sabbath  lib;  Pesachim  32a;  B.  Kamma  10a. 

Or:     S'^n  ''S3n  concerning  this  matter,  the  Tanaim  differ. 

Examples:   R.  Hashana  19b;  Betza  9a;  B.  Metzia  62a, 

§10T. 

3.  An  argument  fro?n  a  close  construction  or  from  implica- 
tion (see  above  §  97)  is  refuted  by  showing  it  to  be  too  arbitra- 
ry, as  the  same  construction,  if  applied  to  another  clause  of 
the  same  passage,  would  result  in  a  contradiction  of  the  con- 
clusions from  the  two  clauses. 

This  refutation  is  mostly  introduced  by:  (Str"'-i)  SB''DS»''« 
tell  me  the  other  clause..,  (and  apply  to  it  the  same  construe- 
tion).... 

The  result  of  this  counter-argument  is  often  added  in  the 

phrase: 

nrn  yot^D^  SD''^  SHD  «^«  bence   nothing  can  be  proved 

herefrom. 

Examples:    Kiddushin  5b;  Yebamoth  76b;  B.  Metzia  26b. 

§108. 

4.  An  argument  from  analogy  (see  above  §  98)  is  refuted 
by  impugning  the  premise,  in   showing  that  the  resemblance 


258  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

between  the  two  cases  is  merely  superficial,  or  that  points  of 
difference  have  been  overlooked  which  vitiate  the  analogy. 
The  phrases  used  in  such  refutations  are: 

a s::n....Dnn''D"T  •'D  are  the  two  cases  alike?  there.... 

here.... 

Examples:    Sabbath  6a;    Kiddushin  Ya;   Gittin  3a. 

b.  ...S*Dn...Qnn  i<nii^n  ''^n  now^  is  this  sot  l.  e.,  is  this  ana- 
logy correct?   There....;  but  here.... 

Examples:  Berachoth  21a;  R.  Hashana  28a;  Kiddushin  Ya. 

Eemark.  The  phrase  >)T\  ""D  is  used  in  refuting  an  analogy  which 
was  intended  to  support  a  proposition,  while  that  of  NnS^TI  ""^n  in  re- 
futing the  analogy  on  which  an  objection  to  a  proposition  was  based. 
In  other  words,  the  former  phrase  is  mostly  applied  in  attacking  a  pro- 
position, and  the  latter  in  repelling  such  an  attack. 

C.  t<n''S-D  ^nTI  h*n\SlD  Hn  «''nh*  '•T'D  ^oes  this  prove  any- 
thifigt  This  case  as  it  is^  and  the  other  case,  as  it  is  ;  i.  e.,  the  two 
cases  are  not  as  analogous  as  you  presume,  since  the  circum- 
stances are  quite  different. 

Examples:   Succah  43b;  Gittin  33a*  B.  Metzia  14b. 

Remark.  This  phrase  is  applied  especially  in  refuting  an  analogy 
based  on  the  parallelism  or  the  juxtaposition  of  two  cases  in  one  and 
the  same  Mishna  paragraph  (fc^S^Dl  t^SJ^"*!). 

§  109. 

5.  An  indirect  argument  (see  above  §  100)  is  often  refut- 
ed by  a  counter-argument,  showing  that  a  similar  objection,  as 
had  been  raised  against  the  contradictory  proposition,  might 
also  be  raised  against  the  original  proposition.  To  remove  the 
latter  objection,  a  distinction  must  necessarily  be  made,  but  this 
distinction  at  the  same  time  removes  the  objection  against  the 
contradictory  proposition,  and  thus  destroy  s  the  whole  indirect 
argument. 

The  phrases  used  in  introducing  such  a  count er-argn- 
ment  are: 


Refutation  259 


a   (   "d:  -a'pn)  (?  sr,'-:  ■'o)  ...iovd^i  i^it  according  to 

your  own  opinion...     (does  it     agree    with  ilio   passage    re 
ferredto')  (is  there  not   also  an  objection  to  be   raised.'..) 

Examples:   Yoina   8b;   Posachim   19b;  Betza  8a. 

b  (i^^m  -o:)(?n-OSp-!2)  ...>S0i<'7Sl  and  what  then?.. 
(shallit  be  so  as  you  say?  i.  e.  do  you  want  me  to  accept 
your   proposition?)  but  also   against  this  the   objection  is.... 

Examples:   Berachoth  27a;   Betza  13a;   B.  Mctzia   3a. 

Remark.  The  words  <t!0  sbx  introducing  such  a  counter-argu- 
ment must  not  be  confounded  with  the  same  words  in  a  different 
rnnecttou  iu  which  they  are  to  be  translated  by:  what  hen  ,s...? 
ZThen  mea«s?  as:  ,n,>.  >S0  Kb«  "but  what  means  «-  e.,ros 
Zn\n^^  .'(Rosh  Havana  23b),  or  in  the  frequent  phrase: -KO  «^S< 
-,«"«•,  lb  n'«  "but  what  then  remains  for  you  to  say?  (Yoma  «b^ 
in  Rosh  flashana  18a,  we  find  on  the  same  page  the  words  ^«0  «^S 
in  three  different    connections  and  meanings. 

§  110. 
6  A  mode  of  refutation  very  frequently  applied  in  the 
Talmudical  discussions,  consists  in  showing  that  the  advanced 
argument,  if  admitted  at  all,  would  prove  too  much,  that 
isTpro;es,  besides  the  intended  conclusion,  an'ither  wh,  h 
is'  manifesti;  inadmissible.  The  characteristic  phrases  used 
in  this  mode  of  invalidating  an  argument  are: 

argument"\o;  conclusion)  were  correct,  its  -nsequences 
ou-ht  also  to  extend  to  that  other  case  of...  to  ^hich, 
however,    they  do  not   extend  ^^ 

.J;^..  (thi:  ctso)?  since  it  ought  to  apply  also  to  the 
'"%tmples:    Berachoth   16b;  Betza   8a;   Gittin   10a. 

§111. 
T      A  similar  but  more  effective  mode  of  overthrowing  an 
arguments  to  introduce  another  analogous  case  where  the 


260  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

application  of  that  argument   would  lead  to  a  palpable  absur- 
dity. 

The  phraseology  of  this  kind  of  refutation  is: 
"»Di  ''Jsn...  nn^D  i^bi^  but  now  (according  to  your  argument 
or  conclusion),  can  it  apply  also  to  that  other  case  of...? 
Examples:  Berachoth  13a;  Pesachim  5a;  Gittin  23a. 

§  112. 

8.  Propositions  as  well  as  arguments  are  often  refuted  by 
the  objection  that  the  advanced  opinion  is  without  parallel  and 
example,  and  against  common  sense,  or  against  the  establish- 
ed principles  in  law. 

...."I  ''TD  S*::''S*  ""D  is  there  anything  like  this,  that...? 
Examples:   Yoma  2b;   Betza  13b;   Sanhedrin  55a. 
§  113. 

9.  A  mild  and  polite  mode  of  refuting  an  argument  is  that 
which, instead  of  a  decided  objection, merely  intimates  a  certain 
possibility  which  would  invalidate  the  argument  under  consider- 
ation.      Such  refutations  are  introduced  either   by fc<D''S1 

but  I  might  say...;  f.  ex.   Yoma  2b,  or,  by...  i<i2^m  but  per- 
haps....; f.  ex.  Sabbath  5a;  B.  Metzia  8b. 

The  answer  to  such  a  mild  objection  or  refutation  is  often: 
*jnj;i  i^pbo  i<b  this  cannot  enter  thy  mind,  i.  e.,  you  can  impos- 
sibly think  so,  since...;  f.  ex.,  K.  Hashana  13a. 


CHAPTER  XII. 

THE   DEBATE. 

1.    Definition  and  Terms. 

§  114. 

Besides  the  minor  discussions  to  be  found  almost  on 
every  page  of  the  Talmud,  and  consisting^  either  of  a  query, 
an  answer,  and  a  rejoinder,  or  of  an  argument,  an  objection, 
and  a  defense,  the  Talmud  contains  also  numerous  more 
elaborate  discussions  or  debates  in  which  two  or  more 
teachers  holding  different  opinions  on  a  certain  question 
contend  with  each  other  in  mutual  argumentation.  Such  an 
interchange  of  arguments  between  opposing  parties  is 
termed  H"'*ltDT  S^pty  (literally,  taking  up  and  throwing  back^ 
namely,  arguments).  A  debate  displaying  great  dialectical 
acumen  is  termed  ^1S^3.  These  debates  generally  concern 
either  the  interpretation  and  application  of  a  provision  of 
the  Mishna,  or  a  new  principle  of  law  advanced  by  an  Amora. 
2.  The  Principal  Debaters. 
§  116. 

The  debates  recorded  in  the  Talmud  are  generally  between 
the  associate  members  of  an  academy,  or  between  a  teacher 
and  his  prominent  disciples.  The  most  noted  among  them 
are  the  following: 

R.  Jochanan   with   Resh  Lakish. 

Rab  Huna  with  Rab  Nachman;  also  with  Rab  Shesheth 
and  Rab   Chisda. 

Rab  Nachman   with   Rab   Shesheth;  also  with  Raba. 

Rab  Chisda  with  Rab  Schesheth;  also  with  Rab  Nach- 
man b.  Isaac. 

Rabba  with  Rab  Joseph;  also  with  Raba  and  with  Abaye. 

Raba  with  Abaye,  and  both  of  them  also  with  Rab 
Papa   and  with   Rabina  I. 

Abaye  with  Rab  Dime. 


262  Terminology  and  Methodology. 

RabAshe  with  Amemar,  also  with  Rabina,  with  Mar  Zutra 
and  Rab  Acha. 

Of  most  of  the  other  numerous  Amoraim  only  opinions, 
remarks,  traditions  and  occasional  discussions,  but  no  formal 
debates  are  recorded  in  the  Talmud. 

Some  contemporary  authorities,  as  Rab  and  Mar  Samuel, 
though  widely  differing  from  each  other  in  many  legal  questions, 
are  rarely  (f.  i.,  B.  Kamma  75a;  Aboda  Zarah  36a)  mentioned 
as  having  been  personally  engaged  in  debates  with  each  other. 
But  their  differences  of  opinion  are  frequently  quoted,  and 
made  a  basis  of  academical  discussions  between  the  teachers 
of  later  2;enerations. 


i=>^ 


3.     Illustration  of  Debates. 
§  116. 

The  following  synopsis  of  a  debate  between  Rabba  and 
Rab  Joseph,  the  former  being  seconded  by  Abaye,  may  serve 
to  illustrate  the  usual  procedure  in  the  Talmudical  controver- 
sies. 

In  Baba  Kamma  56b  the  question  is  as  to  the  degree  of 
legal  responsibility  of  riT'ai^  IDV^,  that  is,  of  the  keeper  of  a 
lost  object  waiting  for  its  owner  to  claim  it. 

Rabba  maintains  that  the  responsibility  of  that  keeper  is 
only  that  of  a  gratuilous  depositary  (Din  noiti')  who  is  not 
liable  for  the  loss  of  the  object  entrusted  to  his  care,  except  in 
the  case  of  gross  negligence. 

Rab  Joseph  holds  that  he  has  the  greater  responsibility  of 
a /^/^  depositary  (n'^^ty  noVu*)  who  is  liable  for  all  losses  ex- 
cept those  caused  by  inevitable  accident. 

The  reasons  for  each  of  these  two  opinions  are  stated. 

Rab  Joseph  opens  the  debate  with  the  attempt  to  refute 
the  opinion  of  his  opponent  (n2"i^  C)DV  3n  n'^an'^N*)  by  showing 
it  to  be  in  conflict  with  a  passage  in  the  Mishna. 

Rabba  parries  this  attack  by  construing  that  Mishna  pas- 
sage differently. 


The  Debate. 


263 


B.  J.  objects  to  this  construction. 
Rabba  removes  the  objection. 

R  J.  renews  his  attack  by  appealing  to  a  Baraitha  from 
which  he  infers  that  the  keeper  of  a  lost  object  has  the  greater 
responsibility   of  a  paid  depositary. 

Rabba  admits  the  correctness  of  this  inference  in  the  special 
case  mentioned  in  that  Baraitha,  but  denies  its  general  applica- 
tion to  the  question  at  issue.  . 

After  having  thus  far  been  successful  on  the  defensive, 
Rabba  assumes  the  offensive  {vpV  an"?  nni  ""invs),  by  calling 
attention  to  another  Baraitha  which  he  dialectically  interprets 
in  such  a  way  as  to  be  a  refutation  of  his  opponent's  opinion. 
R  J  overthrows  the  refutation  by  showing  that  there  was 
no  necessity  for  construing  this  Baraitha  just  in  the  way  as 
done  by  his  opponent. 

Now  Abaye,  a  disciple  of  Rabba,  enters  the  arena  to  see- 
end  the  opinion  of  his  master.  Addressing  liimself  to  the  op- 
ponent  of  the  latter,  he  quotes  a  reported  decision  of  he 
acknowledged  authority  of  one  of  the  former  Amoraim  in  Pales- 
tine  (R.  Jochanan)  from  which  decision  he,  by  indu^ct  reasoning, 
draws  the  conclusion  that  the  keeper  of  a  lost  object  has  only 
the  responsibility  of  a  gratuitous  depositary. 

Rab  Joseph  rejects  this  conclusion  by  restricting  the  deci- 
sion  of  the  quoted  authority  to  certain  circumstances  which 

''^TayeTenies  that  the  case  is  altered  even  under  the  sup- 
posed  circumstances,  and  the  discussion  contmucs  without 
feadVngtoa  definite  result.  But  later  autliorities  decided  >n 
ffvor  of  Rab  Joseph's  opinion  which  is  adopted  in  the  Kabbi- 

nical  codes.  .  ^  ^       v 

other  examples  of  such  debates  are  furnished :  Toma 
61,_?b;  Pesachim  46b-4Ta  ;  Mocd  Katon  "ib  ;  Kuh lus^in 
59a-  Gittin  32b-33a;  Ncdarim  25b-27a;  B.  Kamma  Ola- 
62a'  B.  Metzia  43a;  B.  Bathra  45a— 4oa. 

Remark.    Different  from  these  debates  in  which  two  Amoraim 
holding  opposite  opinions  argue  porsonaliy  against  each  o.her.  are  the 


264  Terminology  and  Methodology 

discussions  of  the  Gemara  on  a  reported  difference  between  authorities 
of  a  former  generation  (f.  ex.  Gittin  2asqq.)  in  which  discussions,  ar- 
guments for  and  against  either  of  those  authorities  are  advanced, 
refuted  or  defended.  See  above  §§  74—80. 

4.   Anonymouus  Discussions  and  Debates. 

Dicussions  and  debates  are,  as  a  rule,  reported  very  care- 
fully with  the  names  of  those  engaged  therein.  But  in  nu- 
merous instances,  the  names  are  omitted,  so  that  either  a 
question  or  an  answer,  or  both  of  them  are  reported  anonymously. 
Sometimes,  a  lengthy  discussion  carried  on  anonymously  is  in- 
terrupted by  an  answer  made  by  an  authority  mentioned  by 
name.  At  other  times  again,  a  debate  started  by  named 
authorities  is  continued  anonymously. 

The  omission  of  names  in  a  discussion  is  probably  indicative 
that  this  was  a  general  discussion  among  the  members  of  the 
academy,  while  only  the  questions  and  answers  of  the  prominent 
teachers  were  recorded  with  the  names  of  their  authors. 

In  consequence  of  the  succinct  and  elliptical  mode  ol 
expression,  so  prevalent  in  the  Talmud,  and  in  the  absence  ol 
all  punctuation  marks,  the  anonymous  discussions  especially, 
often  offer  great  and  perplexing  difficulties  to  the  inexperienced 
student,  as  question  and  answer  are  there  sometimes  so  closely 
connected  that  it  requires  a  considerable  practice  in  Talmud 
reading  to  discern  where  the  one  ends  and  the  other  begins. 


PART    IV. 


OUTLINES    OF    TALMUDICAL    ETHICS. 


OUTLINES   OF   TALMUDICAL    ETHICS. 

Ethics  is  the  flower  and  fruit  on  the  tree  of  religion. 
The  ultimate  aim  of  religion  is  to  ennoble  man's  inner 
and  outer  life,  so  that  he  may  love  and  do  that  only 
which  is  right  and  good.  This  is  a  biblical  teaching  which  is 
emphatically  repeated  in  almost  every  book  of  Sacred  Scrip- 
tures. Let  me  only  refer  to  the  sublime  word  of  the  pro- 
phet Micah:  *'He  hath  showed  thee,  O  man,  what  is  good, 
and  what  doth  the  Lord  require  of  thee,  but  to  do  justice 
and  to  love  kindness  and  to  walk  humbly  with  thy  God.  <' 
(Micah  vi,    8). 

As  far  as  concerns  the  Bible,  its  ethical  teachings  are 
generally  known.  Translated  into  all  languages  of  the  world, 
that  holy  book  is  accessible  to  every  one,  and  whoever 
reads  it  with  open  eyes  and  with  an  unbiased  mind  will 
admit  that  it  teaches  the  highest  principles  of  morality, 
principles  which  have  not  been  surpassed  and  superseded 
by   any   ethical  system  of  ancient  or  modern   philosophy. 

But  how  about  the  Talmud,  that  immense  literary  work 
whose  authority  was  long  esteemed  second  to  that  of  the 
Bible  ?  What  are   the   ethical   teachings  of  the  Talmud  ? 

Although  mainly  engaged  with  discussions  of  the  Law, 
as  developed  on  the  basis  of  the  Bible  during  Israel's  se- 
cond commonwealth  down  to  the  sixth  century  of  the 
Christian  era,  the  Talmud  devotes  also  much  attention  to 
ethical  subjects.  Not  only  are  one  treatise  of  the  Mishiia 
{Pirke  Aboth)  and  some  Baraithoth  (as,  Aboth  (T R.  Nathan, 
and  Derech  Eretz)  almost  exclusively  occupied  with  ethical 
teachings,  but  such  teachings  are  also  very  abundantly 
contained  in  the  Aggadic  (homiletical)  passages  which  are 
so  frequently  interspersed  in  the  legal  discussions  throughout 
all  parts  of  the   Talmud.* 

'  Also  the  Midrasli,  a  post-Talinu.lic  collection  of  t-xrracta 
from  popular  lectures  of  tlie  ancient  toachcra  on  Biblical  texts, 
contains  an  abundance  of  ethical  teachiuffs  and  maxims  advanced 
by  the  sages  of  the  Talmud,  wlii<'h  must  likewise  be  taken  into 
consideration,    when  speaking   of  Tahuudicai    Eihics. 


268  Outlines  op  Talmudical  Ethics. 

It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  Talmudical  litera- 
ture embraces  a  period  of  about  eight  centuries^  and  that 
the  numerous  teachers  whose  ethical  views  and  utterances 
are  recorded  in  that  vast  literature,  rank  differently  in  re- 
gard to  mind  and  authority.  At  the  side  of  the  great  lumi- 
naries, we  find  also  lesser  ones.  At  the  side  of  utterances 
of  great,  clear-sighted  and  broad-minded  masters  with 
lofty  ideas,  we  meet  also  with  utterances  of  peculiar  views 
which  never  obtained  authority.  Not  every  ethical  remark 
or  opinion  quoted  in  that  literature  can,  therefore,  be  re- 
garded as  an  index  of  the  standard  of  Talmudical  ethics, 
but  such  opinions  only  can  be  so  regarded  which  are 
expressed  with  authority  and  which  are  in  harmony  with 
the  general  spirit  that  pervades  the  Talmudic  literature. 

Another  point  to  be  observed  is  the  circumstance  that 
the  Talmud  does  not  treat  of  ethics  in  a  coherent,  philo- 
sophical system.  The  Talmudic  sages  made  no  claim  of 
being  philosophers;  they  were  public  teachers,  expounders 
of  the  Law,  popular  lecturers.  As  such,  they  did  not  care 
for  a  methodically  arranged  system.  All  they  wanted  was  to 
spread  among  the  people  ethical  teachings  in  single,  concise, 
pithy,  pointed  sentences,  well  adapted  to  impress  the  minds 
and  hearts,  or  in  parables  or  legends  illustrating  certain  moral 
duties  and  virtues.  And  this,  their  method,  fully  answered 
its  purpose.  Their  ethical  teachings  did  actually  reach  the 
Jewish  masses,  and  influenced  their  conduct  of  life,  while 
among  the  Greeks,  the  ethical  theories  and  systems  re- 
mained a  matter  that  concerned  the  philosophers  only, 
without  exercising  any  educating  influence  upon  the  mas- 
ses at  large. 

Furthermore,  it  must  be  remembered  that  the  Talmu- 
dical ethics  is  largely  based  on  the  ethics  of  the  Bible. 
The  sacred  treasure  of  biblical  truth  and  wisdom  was  in 
the  minds  and  hearts  of  the  Rabbis.  This  treasury  they 
tried  to  enrich  by  their  own  wisdom  and  observation.   Here 


Outlines  of  Talmudical  Ethics.  269 

they  develop  a  principle  contained  in  a  scriptural  passage, 
and  give  it  a  wider  scope  and  a  larger  application  to 
life's  various  conditions.  There  they  crystallize  great  moral 
ideas  into  a  pithy,  impressive  maxim  as  guide  for  lur.nan 
conduct.  Here  they  give  to  a  jewel  of  biblical  ethics  a 
new  lustre  by  setting  it  in  the  gold  of  their  own  wisdom. 
There  again  they  combine  single  pearls  of  biblical  wisdom 
to  a   graceful  ornament  for  human   life. 

Let  us  now  try  to  give  a  few  outlines  of  the  ethical 
teachings  of  the  Talmud.  In  the  first  place,  concerning 
Man  as  a  Moral  Being. 

In  accordance  with  the  teaching  of  the  Bible,  the  rab- 
bis duly  emphasize  man's  dignity  as  a  being  created  in  the 
likeness  of  God.'  By  this  likeness  of  God  they  understand 
the  spiritual  being  within  us,  that  is  endowed  with  intel- 
lectual and  moral  capacities.  The  higher  desires  and  inspi- 
rations which  spring  from  this  spiritual  being  m  man,  are 
called  Yetzer  tob^  the  good  inclination;  but  the  lower  appe- 
tites and  desires  which  rise  from  our  physical  nature  and 
which  we  share  with  the  animal  creation,  are  termed  Yetzer 
ha-ra^  the  inclination  to  evil.^  Not  that  these  sensuous  de- 
sires are  absolutely  evil;  for  they,  too,  have  been  implant- 
ed in  man  for  good  purposes.  Without  them  man  could 
not  exist,  he  would  not  cultivate  and  populate  this 
earth  %  or,  as  a  Talmudical  legend  runs:  Once,  some 
overpious  people  wanted  to  pray  to  God  that  they 
might  be  able  to  destroy  the  Yetzer  ha-ra,  but  a  war- 
ning voice  was  heard,  saying:  ''Beware,  lest  you  destroy 
this  world  1"*       Evil    are   those   lower   desires  only    in    that 


»  Aboth  I^i.,  14:  R.  Akiba  used  to  say:  "How  distinguished 
is  man,  since  created  in  the  image  of  God,  and  istill  more  dis- 
tinguished by  the  consciousness  of  having  been  created  in  the 
image  of  God  1" 

^  Mishna  Berachoth   IX, 5:  yn  nv^^^  mt:  -lV^n    "I^V^  ^JL"! 

•  Midrash  R.  Bereshith  IX:  'Ol  -^7)"^  ^Sl'?\St:'  yi  1^''  HT  TKD  31C  n^?^^ 

*  Yoma  69b:  .ND^y    N^b  n'b  in^Scp   ^NT  ^TH 


270  Outlines  of  Talmudical  Ethics. 

they,  if  unrestrained,  easily  mislead  man  to  live  contrary 
to  the  demands  and  aspirations  of  his  divine  nature.  Hence 
the  constant  struggle  in  man  between  the  two  inclinations. » 
He  who  submits  his  evil  inclination  to  the  control  of  his 
higher  aims  and  desires,  is  virtuous  and  righteous.  ''The 
righteous  are  governed  by  the  Yetzer  tob,  but  the  wicked 
by  the  Yetzer  ha-ra^  ''The  righteous  have  their  desires  in 
their  power,  but  the  wicked  are  in  the  power  of  their 
desires."^ 

Free-will. 

Man's  free  will  is  emphasized  in  the  following  sentences: 
"Everything  is  ordained  by  God's  providence,  but  freedom 
of  choice  is  given  to  man."*  "Everything  is  foreordained 
by  heaven,  except  the  fear  of  heaven"^  or,  as  another 
sage  puts  it:  Whether  man  be  strong  or  weak,  rich  or  poor, 
wise  or  foolish  depends  mostly  on  circumstances  that 
surround  him  from  the  time  of  his  birth,  but  whether  man 
be  good  or  bad,  righteous  or  wicked,  depends  upon  his  own 
free  will." 

God's  Will,  the  Ground  of  Man's  Duties. 

The  ground  of  our  duties,  as  presented  to  us  by  the 
Talmudical  as  well  as  the  biblical  teachings,  is  that  it  is 
the  will  of  God.  His  will  is  the  supreme  rule  of  our  being. 
"Do  His  will  as  thy  own  will,  submit  thy  will  to  His 
will".'  "Be  bold  as  a  leopard,  light  as  an  eagle,  swift 
as  a  roe,  and  strong  as  a  lion,  to  do  the  will  of  thy  Father, 
who   is  in  heaven"." 

Man   Accountable  to  God  for  his  Conduct. 

Of  man's   responsibility  for  the  conduct   of  his    life,   we 


»  Kiddushin  30b:  DV  Sd3  V^y  C^nnriD  Dl&<  ^Ji^  IIVV  Berachoth  5b: 

«   Berachoth    61b.   ^  Midrash  Bereshith  XXXHL 
*  Aboth  III,  15.     »  Berachoth  33a.     •  Nidda  16b. 
»    Aboth  n,  4.     •  Ibid.  V,  20. 


Outlines  of  Talmudical  Ethics.  271 

are  forcibly  reminded  by  numerous  sentences,  as:  "Consider 
three  things,  and  thou  wilt  never  fall  into  sin;  remember 
that  there  is  above  thee  an  all-seeing  eye,  an  all  hearing 
ear,  and  a  record  of  all  thy  actions".'  And  again,  '^Con- 
sider  three  things,  and  thou  wilt  never  sin;  remember  whence 
thou  comest,  whither  thou  gocst,  and  before  whom  thou  wilt 
have   to   render  account  for  thy   doings.'" 

Higher  Motives  in  Performing  our  Duties. 

Although  happiness  here  and  hereafter  is  promised  as 
reward  for  fulfillment,  and  punishment  threatened  for  neglect 
of  duty,  still  we  are  reminded  not  to  be  guided  by  the  con- 
sideration of  reward  and  punishment,  but  rather  by  love 
and  obedience  to  God,  and  by  love  to  that  which  is  good 
and  noble.  ''Be  not  like  servants,  who  serve  their  master 
for  the  sake  of  reward."'  ''Whatever  thou  doest,  let  it 
be  done  in  the  name  of  heaven"*  (that  is,  for  its  own 
sake). 

Duty  of  Self-Preservation  and  Self-Cultivation. 

As  a  leading  rule  of  the  duties  of  self-preservation  and 
self-cultivation^  and,  at  the  same  time,  as  a  warning  against 
selfishness,  we  have  Hillel's  sentence:  "If  I  do  not  care 
for  myself,  who  will  do  it  for  me  ?  and  if  I  care  only  for 
myself,  what  am  I  ?'"* 

The  duty  of  acquiring  knowledge^  especially  knowledge  of 
the  divine  Law  (Thora)  which  gives  us  a  clearer  insight  in 
God's  will  to  man,  is  most  emphatically  enjoined  in  nume- 
rous sentences:  "Without  knowledge  there  is  no  true  moral- 
ity and  piety."*  "Be  eager  to  acquire  knowledge,  it  does 
not  come  to  thee  by  inheritance".'  "The  more  knowledge, 
the  more  spiritual  life."'  "If  thou  hast  acquired  knowledge, 
what  doest  thou  lack  ?   but  if  thou  lackest  knowledge,   what 


^  Ibid.  II,  1.  '  Ibid.  Ill,  1. 

•  Aboth  I,  3.  «  Ibid.  II,  12.  •  Ibid.  I,  14. 

•  Ibid.  II,  5.  »  Ibid.  II,  12,   "  Ibid.  II,  7. 


2T2  Outlines  op  Talmudicai-  Ethics. 

hast   thou  acquired?'"  But  we  are  also   reminded  that  eren 
the  highest  knowledge  is  of  no  value,   as  long  as   it  dies 
not  influence    our  moral    life.     <^The   ultimate    end   of   al 
knowledge  and  wisdom  is  man's  Inner  purification   and    the 
performance  of  good  and  noble  deeds.'"    "He   whose   know 

to  a  tree  that  has  many  branches,  but  few  and  weak  roots- 
a  storm  cometh  and  overturneth  it.'" 


Labor. 


Next  to  the  duty  of  acquiring  knowledge,  tbat  of  mJust- 

w  11  kit.  T.  "''^"'  "'"'""  ''  ^'^^"«'y  ^°j«"«1.  It  is 
well  known  that  among  the  ancient  nations  in  general 
manua  labor  was  regarded  as  degrading  the  free  dtS 
Even  the  greatest  philosophers  of  antiquity,  a  Plato  and 
Amtotle  could  not  free  themselves  of  this  deprecatLg  vLw 
of  labor.<  How  different  was  the  view  of  the  Talmudic  sageT 

S;  Kf  ..''■'''  ''^°^'^   ""^  '^^''''   "  '^o-'ors    man.". 

'Beautiful  IS  the  intellectual  occupation,  if  combined  with 
some  prac  ical  work."'  "He  who  does  not  teach  his  sJn  a 
handicraft  trade,    neglects  his  parental  duty. '"   "He  who  lives 

in  idi:  s;;-'''  '^"'^' '- '"'''-  ''^^ '-  ^'^  "^ 

nrn  J°  ''f  """^^"^^  ^'^^  ">«««  teachings,  some  of  the  most 
prominent  sages  of  the  Talmud  are  known  to  have  made 
their  hvmg  by  various  kinds  of  handicraft  and  trade. 
Cakdinal  Duties  in  Relation  to  Fellow-mex. 
Regarding  man's  relation  to  fellow-men,  the  rabbis 
consider  jusfu.,  truthfulness,  peauableness  and  charity  as 
cardinal  duties.  They  say,  "The  world  (human  society) 
rests  on  three  things-on  justice,   on  truth  and  on  peace.'"' 

'r:£^^:StH"^ri?  ""^  '"-""^-P  "^ 

■•^th   l'?8        ^'*'*""'™  ***•    •  Berachoth  8a. 


Outlines  op  Tat.mudical  Ethics.  273 

Justice. 
The  principle  of  justia  in  the  moral  sense  is  expressed 
in  the  following  rules:  "Thy  neighbor's  property  must  be 
as  sacred  to  thee,  as  thine  own.-  "Tliy  neighbor  s  honor 
must  be  as  dear  to  thee,  as  thine  own."'  Hereto  belong 
also  the  golden  rule  of  Hillel:  "Whatever  would  be  hateful 
to  thee,  do  not  to  thy  neighbor."" 

Truth  and  Truthfulness. 
The  sacredness  of  iruih  and  truthfulness  is  expressed  in 
the   sentence:  "Truth  i.  the  signet  of  God,  the  Most  Hoy.  __ 
"Let   thy  yea    be  in    truth,     and    thy  nay    be  in  truth. 
"Truth  lasts   forever,    but  falsehood  must  vanish. 

Admonitions  concerning  faithfulness  and  /;V.///v  to  g.ven 
promises  are:    "Promise  little  and  do  much."'   '-To  be  uah- 
less  to  a  given  promise  is  as  sinful  as  idolatry."    "lobi  ak 
a  verbal  engagement,  though  legally  not  bu.aing    is  a  mo  - 
al    wrong.'"  Of  the   numerous    warnings    agamst    anv   lu.  d 
of  deceit!  the  following   may  be  mentioned:    "It  ,s  smful   o 
deceive  any  man,  be  he  even  a   heathen.-  "^e-P  •""    >- 
words  is   as  great  a  sin  as  deception  m  money  mate... 
men,  says  the  Talmud,  the  immortal  soul  will  be  called  to 
recount  before   the  divine  tribunal,   the    first  question   will 
be     "hast  thou  been  honest  and  faithful  in  all  thy  dealings 
with  thy  fellow-men  ?"*' 

Peacefulness. 
Peace  and   harmony   in    domestic  life   and   social    intci-. 

!•  Sabbath  28b. 


274  Outlines  of  Talmudical  Ethics. 

by  us."^  "Be  a  disciple  of  Aaron,  loving  peace,  and  pur- 
suing peace. "^  To  make  peace  between  those  in  disharmony 
is  regarded  as  one  of  the  most  meritorious  works  that 
secure  happiness  and  bliss  here  and  hereafter.^ 

As  virtues  leading  to  peace,  those  of  7?iildness  and 
meekness^  of  gentleness  and  placidity  are  highly  praised 
and  recommended.  ''Be  not  easily  moved  to  anger""  <'Be 
humble  to  thy  superior,  affable  to  thy  inferior,  and  meet 
every  man  with  friendliness."®  ''He  who  is  slow  to  anger,  and 
easily  pacified,  is  truly  pious  and  virtuous.""  "Man,  be  ever 
soft  and  pliant  like  a  reed,  and  not  hard  and  unbending  like 
the  cedar."^  "Those  who,  when  offended,  do  not  give  offence, 
when  hearing  slighting  remarks,  do  not  retaliate — they  are 
the  friends  of  God,  they  shall  shine  forth  like  the  sun  in 
its   glory."* 

Chaeity. 

The  last  of  the  principal  duties  to  fellow-men  is  charity^ 
which  begins  where  justice  leaves  off.  Prof.  Steinthal  in  his 
work  on  General  Ethics,  remarks,  that  among  the  cardinal  virt- 
ues of  the  ancient  philosophers,  we  look  in  vain  for  the  idea 
oi  love  and  chai-ity^  whereas  in  the  teachings  of  the  Bible,  we 
generally  find  the  idea  of  love,  mercy  and  charity  closely  con- 
nected with  that  ofjastice.'  And  we  may  add,  as  in  the  Bible 
so  also  in  the  Talmud,  where  charity  is  considered  as  the  highest 
degree  on  the  scale  of  duties  and  virtues.  It  is  one  of  the  main 
pillars  on  which  the  welfare  of  the  human  world  rests.'" 

The  duty  of  charity  (Gemilath  Chesed)  extends  farther 
than  to  mere  almsgiving  (Tzedaka).  "Almsgiving  is  practiced 
by  means  of  money,  but  charity  also  by  personal  services  and 
by  words  of  advice,  symphaty  and  encouragement.  Alms- 
giving is  a  duty   towards  the  poor  only,  but  charity  towards 


»  Mishna    Oketzin    III,  12.     «  Aboth    I,  13. 

»  Mishna  Peah  I,  1.    *  Aboth  II,  10.    "  Ibid.  Ill,  13.      « Ibid.  V,ll 

'   Taanith  20b.     «   Yoma  23;   Gittin  3  .b. 

•  Allgemeine  Ethik.   p.  108.     ^^  Aboth  I,  3. 


Outlines  of  Talmudical  Ethics,  275 

the  rich  as  well  as  the  poor,  nay,  even  towards  the  dead 
(by  taking  care  of  their  decent  burial)'" 

By  works  of  charity  man  proves  to  be  a  true  image  of  God 
whose  atributes  are  love,  kindness  and  mercy.'  "He  who 
turns  away  from  works  of  love  and  charity  turns  awiiy  from 
God"."  '^The  works  of  charity  have  more  viilue  than  sacrilices; 
they  are  equal  to  the  performance  of  all  religious  duties."* 

Concerning  the  proper  way  of  practicing  this  virtue,  the 
Talmnd  has  many  beautiful  sentences,  as:  "The  merit  of  cha- 
ritable works  is  in  proportion  to  the  love  with  which  they 
are  practiced."'  "Blessed  is  he  who  gives  from  his  substance 
to  the  poor,  twice  blessed  he  who  accompanies  his  gift  with 
kind,  comforting  words".*  "The  noblest  of  all  charities  is  en- 
abling the  poor  to  earn  a  livelihood".'  He  who  iS  unable  to 
give  much,  shall  not  withhold  his  little  mite,  for  "as  a  garment 
is  made  up  of  single  threads,  so  every  single  gift  contributes 
to  accomplish  a  great  work  of  charity"/ 

Duties  concerning  Special  Relations. 

Besides  these  principal  duties  in  rcUitionto  fellow-men  in 
general,  the  Talmud  treats  also  very  elaborately  of  duties  con- 
cerning the  various  relations  of  life.  Not  intending  to  enter 
here  into  all  details,  we  shall  restrict  ourselves  to  some  of  its 
ethical  teachings  in  reference  to  the  domestic  relations,  and 
regarding  the  relation  to  the  country  and  the  community. 

The  Conjugal  Relation. 

"First  build  a  house  and  plant  a  vineyard  (i.  e.,  provide 
for  the  means  of  the  household),  and  then  take  a  wife".*  "Let 
youth  and  old  age  not  be  joined  in  marriage,  lest  the  purity 
and  peace  of  domestic  life  be  disturbed"*"  "A  man's  home  means 


»   Succah  491). 

•  Sotah    14a.     ^    Kethubotii  Gla.     *  Sucrali   4Ua;  H.  Hatlira  9a. 

•  Succah  49a.     «  li.  Hathra  91).     '  Sabbath  63a.     •   B.  Bathra  10b. 

•  Sotah  44a.      '°  Saiilie  Iriii  7Gu. 


2*^6  Outlines  of  Talmudical  Ethics. 

his  wife."i  <'Let  a  man  be  careful  to  honor  his  wife,  for  he 
owes  to  her  alone  all  the  blessings  of  his  house".  =»  ^^f  thy 
wife  is  small,  bend  down  to  her,  to  take  counsel  from  her" » 
'^Who  IS  rich  ?  He  who  has  a  noble  wife."*  <^A  manshould  be 
careful  lest  he  afflict  his  wife,  for  God  counts  her  tears. "«  'af 
m  anger  the  one  hand  removed  thy  wife  or  thy  child,  let  the 
other  hand  again  bring  them  back  to  thy  heart."'  ^'^He  who 
loves  his  wife  as  his  own  self,  and  honors  her  more  than 
himself,  and  he  who  educates  his  children  in  the  right  way 
to  him  applies  the  divine  promise  :  Thou  shalt  know  that 
there  is  peace  in  thy  tent."^  '^Tears  are  shed  on  God's  altar 
for  the  one  who  forsakes  the  wife  of  his  youth."^  <'He  who 
divorces  his  wife,  is  hated  before  God".' 

Parents  and  Children. 

'Parental  love  should  be  impartial,  one  child  must  not  be 
preferred  to  the  other".-  "It  is  a  fathers  duty  not  only  to 
provide  for  his  minor  children,  but  also  to  take  care  of  their 
instruction,  and  to  teach  his  son  a  trade  and  whatever  is  ne- 
cessary  for  his  future  welfare".-  ^The  honor  and  reverence 
due  to  parents  are  equal  to  the  honor  and  reverence  due  to 
God".'^  ^^Where  children  honor  their  parents,  there  Goddwels 
there  He  is  honored"^'.  ' 

Country  and  Community. 

Regarding  duties  to  the  country  and  the  community,  the 
Rabbis  teach:  -The  law  of  the  country  is  as  sacred  and  bind- 
ing as  God's  law".-  '^Prayfor  the  welfare  of  the  government- 
without  respect  for  the  government,  men  would  swallow  each 
other".-  -Do  not  isolate  thyself  from  the  community  and 
its  interests".^'     -It  is  sinful  to  deceive  the  government  regard- 

;Yoma2a.     «  B.  Metzia  59a.     -Ibid.     *  Sabbath  25b. 

*TU^^^t^fu:     '^^t^^^^-     ^  Yebamoth  62b.     •  Gittin  90b. 
Ibid.    >°  Sabbath  10b.     »»  Kiddushin  29a.     >»  Ibid  29b 

Bathra  54b.    "  Aboth   III,  2.     >»  Ibid   II,  4. 


Outlines  of  Talmudical  Ethics.  277 

ing  taxes  and  duties".*  *'Do  not  aspire  for  pul)lic  offices'"; 
*<but  where  there  are  no  men,  try  thou  to  be  the  nuin".* 
^'Those  who  work  for  the  community  shall  do  it  witliout  self- 
ishness, but  with  the  pure  intention  to  promote  its  wel- 
fare".* 

General  Characteristics. 

To  these  short  outlines  of  Talmudical  ethics  let  us  add 
only  a  few  general  remarks.  Being  essentially  a  developmont  of 
the  sublime  ethical  principles  and  teachings  of  the  Bil)le,  the 
Talmudical  ethics  retains  the  general  characteristics  of  that 
origin. 

It  teaches  nothing  that  is  against  human  nature,  nothing 
that  is  incompatible  with  the  existence  and  welfare  of  human 
society.  It  is  free  from  the  extreme  excess  and  austerity  to 
which  the  lofty  ideas  of  religion  and  morality  were  carried 
by  the  theories  and  practices  of  some  sects  inside  and  outside 
of  Judaism. 

Nay,  many  Talmudical  maxims  and  sayings  are  evidently 
directed  against  such  austerities  and  extravagances.  Thus 
they  warn  against  the  monastic  idea  of  obtaining  closer 
communion  with  God  by  fleeing  from  human  society  and 
by  seclusion  from  temporal  concerns  of  life  :  ''Do  not  sepa- 
rate thyself  from  society."'  ''Man's  thoughts  and  ways  shall 
always  be  in  contact  and  sympathy  with  fellow-men."*  ''No 
one  shall  depart  from  the  general  customs  and  manners."^ 
"Better  is  he  who  lives  on  the  toil  of  his  hand,  than  he  who 
indulges  in  idle  piety.'"* 

They  strongly  discountenance  the  idea  of  celibacy^  which 
the  Essenes,  and  later,  some  orders  of  the  Cijurch  regard(Hl 
as  a  superior  state  of  perfection.  The  rabljis  say:  "He  who 
lives  without  a  wife  is  no  perfect    man.'"     '*To  be  unmarried 

»   Pesachim   112b:    03^0.1    p  l^vy  nnnn  SnI  al>o  H.  Kaiuiua  113a 

"  Aboth  I,  10.     •   Ibi.l.  II.  5.     *  ll)i(l.  II,  2. 

•  Aboth  II,  4.     •  K«'tlnib.)th  11a.       '  B.  Motzia  HC.b. 

.•  Berachot  «b.    »  Yebamoth  Cja. 


278  Outlines  of  Talmudical  Ethics. 

is  to  live  without  joy,  without  blessing,  without  kindness, 
without  religion  and  without  peace.'"  ^'As  soon  as  man  mar- 
ries, his  sins  decrease."^ 

While,  on  the  one  hand,  they  warn  against  too  much 
indulgence  in  pleasures  and  in  the  gratification  of  bodily 
appetites  and  against  the  insatiable  pursuit  of  earthly  goods 
and  riches,  as  well  as  against  the  inordinate  desire  of  honor 
and  power,  on  the  other  hand,  they  strongly  disapprove  the 
ascetic  mortification  of  the  body  and  abstinence  from  en- 
joyment, and  the  cynic  contempt  of  all  luxuries  that  beau- 
tify life.  They  say:  "God's  commandments  are  intended  to 
enhance  the  value  and  enjoyment  of  life,  but  not  to  mar  it 
and  make  it  gloomy. "^  "If  thou  hast  the  means,  enjoy  life's 
innocent  pleasures.'"  "He  who  denies  himself  the  use  of  wine 
is  a  sinner.'"  "No  one  is  permitted  to  afllict  himself  by 
unnecessary  fasting.'"  "The  pious  fool,  the  hypocrite,  and 
the  Pharisaic  flagellant  are  destroyers  of  human  society."^ 
"That  which  beautifies  life  and  gives  it  vigor  and  strength, 
just  as  riches  and  honor,  is  suitable  to  the  pious,  and 
agreeable  to  the  world  at  large."* 

Finally,  one  more  remark  :  The  Talmud  has  often  been 
accused  of  being  illiberal,  as  if  teaching  its  duties  only  for 
Jews  towards  fellow-believers,  but  not  also  towards  fellow- 
men  in  general.  This  charge  is  entirely  unfounded.  It  is 
true,  and  quite  natural,  that  in  regard  to  the  ritual  and  ce- 
remouial  law  and  practice,  a  distinction  between  Jew  and 
Gentile  was  made.  It  is  also  true,  that  we  occasionally 
meet  in  the  Talmud  with  an  uncharitable  utterance  against 
the  heathen  world.  But  it  must  be  remembered  in  what 
state  of  moral  corruption  and  degradation  their  heathen 
surroundings   were,   at   that  time.     And  this,    too,   must    be 


»  Ibid.  63a.      ""  Ibid.  63b. 
»  Yoma  85b:    DHn  ni^^:^   vh\    DHl  ^m.    *  Erubin  54a:  ^  e^>    DX 
^  niD^n.     '  Taanith  11a.     '  Ibid.  22b.     '  Mishna   Sota  III,  4. 

«  Baraitha,  Aboth  VI,   8:  D^Hvij  nK3  ...lUDm  •^t^'1y^1  Hani  ^JH 


Outlines  of  Talmud ical  Ethics.  279 

remembered,  that  such  utterances  are  only  made  l)y  individ- 
uals who  gave  vent  to  their  indignation  in  view  of  the 
cruel  persecutions  whose  victims  they  were.  As  regards 
7tioral  teachings,  the  Talmud  is  as  broad  as  humanity.  It  tea- 
ches duties  of  man  to  man  without  distinction  of  creed  and 
race.  In  most  of  the  ethical  maxims,  the  terms  Adam  and 
Beriyot^  ''man,"  "fellow- men,"  are  emphatically  used;  as:  "Do 
not  despise  any  man."i  "Judge  every  man  from  his  favorable 
side.'""  "Seek  peace,  and  love  fellow-men.'"  "He  who  is  pleas- 
ing to  fellow-men  is  also  pleasing  to  God.'"  "The  right  way 
for  man  to  choose,  is  to  do  that  which  is  honorable  in  his 
own  eyes  (i.  e.,  approved  by  his  conscience)  and  at  the  same 
time,  honorable  in  the  eyes  of  his  fellow- men.'"  In  some  in- 
stances, the  Talmud  expressly  reminds  that  the  duties  of 
justice,  veracity,  peacefulness  and  charity  are  to  be  fulfilled 
towards  the  heathen  as  well  as  to  the  Israelites;  as:  "It  is 
sinful  to  deceive  any  man,  be  he  even  a  heathen.""  It  is 
our  duty  to  relieve  the  poor  and  needy,  to  visit  the  sick 
and  bury  the  dead  without   distinction  of  creed  and  race."" 

"Thou  Shalt  love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself"  (Lev.  XIX, 
18);  this  is,  said  R.  Akiba,  the  all  embracing  principle  of 
the  divine  law.  But  Ben  Azai  said,  there  is  another  passage 
in  Scriptures  still  more  embracing;  it  is  the  passage  (Gen., 
V,  2):  "This  is  the  book  of  the  generations  of  man;  in  the 
day  that  God  created  man,  he  made  him  in  the  likeness  of 
God.'"  That  sage  meant  to  say, this  passage  is  more  embracing, 
since  it  clearly  tells  us  who  is  our  neighbor;  not,  as  it  might  be 
misunderstood,  our  friend  only,  not  our  fellow-citizen  only,  not 
our  co-religionist  only,  but  since  we  all  descend  from  a  com- 
mon ancestor,  since  all  are  created  in  the  image  and  likeness 
of  God,  every  man,  every  human  being  is  our  brother,  our 
neighbor  whom  we  shall  love  as  ourselves. 


»  Aboth  IV,  3.     »  Il.ia.  I,  G.     «  Ibi.l.  I,  13.     *  Ibid.  Ill,  10. 

•  Ibid.  II,  1.  •  ChuUin  94a.    '  Gittin  Gla.  *  Siphra  on  Lev.  XIX,  18. 


280  Outlines  of  Talmudical  Ethics. 

The  liberal  spirit  of  Talmudic  ethics  is  most  strikingly 
evidenced  in  the  sentence:  '<The  pious  and  virtuous  of  all 
nations  participate  in  the  eternal  bliss,'"  which  teaches  that 
man's  salvation  depends  not  on  the  acceptance  of  certain 
articles  of  belief,  nor  on  certain  ceremonial  observances,  but 
on  that  which  is  the  ultimate  aim  of  religion,  namely,  Morality^ 
purity  of  heart  and  holiness  of  life. 


1  Tosephta  Sanhedrin   ch.    XIII;  Maimonides  Yad  Hachezaka, 
Teshuba  III,  5;  Melachim  VIII,  11. 


ALPHABETICAL  INDEX  OF  THE  PRINCIPAL  TANAIM 
AND  AMORAIM. 


A. 

Page. 

Page. 

Chiya  bar  Abba  . 

45 

Abba(Areca  or  Aricha)= 

: 

D.— H. 

Rab. 

39.43 

Abba  Saul    . 

35 

Dime    .        .        .        • 

63 

Abbahu         .        .        • 

45 

Dosa  b.  Harchinas 

26 

Abaye 

Acha             .        . 

49 
39 

Elazar  b.  Azariah 
Elazar  b.  Jacob    . 

27 
35 

Acha  of  Dif  te 

53 

Elazar  of  Modein 

30 

Achai  bar  Huna 

55 

Ela7,ar  (b.  Shatnua)  T. 

34 

Ada  (or  Ide)  bar  Abin 

53 

Elazar  (b.  Padath)  Am. 

45 

Admon 

25 

Elazar  b.  Simon  . 

38 

Akabia  b.  Ma,halalel   . 

24 

Elazar  b.  Zadok 

86 

Akiba 

29 

Eliezer  (b.  Hyrcanos). 

26 

Ame     .        ,        .        • 

45 

Eliezer  b.  Jacob 

26 

Amemar       .        i        • 

52 

Gamaliel  (the  Elder) . 

24 

Ashe     ,       .        .        . 

51 

Gamaliel  II  of  Jamnia 

25 

Assi      .        .        .        • 

45 

Gamaliel  lU. 

41 

Gebiha 

53 

B. 

Hillel    .... 

23 

Bar  Kappara 

37 

Hillel  II       .        .        . 

48 

Bar  Napacha 

Hoshaya  (or  Oshaya) . 

39 

(Jochanan)     . 

42 

Huna 

46 

Ben  Azai     . 

31 

I.— J. 

Ben  Bathyra 

27 

Ben  Zoma    . 

30 

Ide  bar  Abin 

53 

Ben  Nanos  (Simon)    . 

30 

Ilai        .... 

83 

Beth  Hillel 
Beth  Shamai      ( 

24 

Ise  b.  Judah. 

89 

Ishmael  (b.  Elisha)     . 

28 

0. 

Ishmael  bar  Jose 

39 

Janai  (the  Elder) 

39 

Cahana 

63 

Jehuda,  see  Juda. 

Chanan 

25 

Jeremiah  (or  Jirmiah) 

48 

Chanina,  chief  of  the 

Jochanan  b.  Broka 

80 

Priests    . 

24 

Jochanan  (bar  Napacha 

).        42 

Chanina  (bar  Chama) 

41 

Jochanan  b.  Nuri 

29 

Chisda  (or  Chasda)      . 

46 

Jochanan,  theSandelar 

84 

Chizkia 

42 

Jochanan  b.  Zaccai     . 

24 

Chiya,  the  great 

Jonah     .... 

48 

(or  the  Elder) 

39 

Jonathan  (the  Elder)  . 

89 

282 


Index  of  Principal  Tanaim  and  Amoraim. 


Page. 
Jose  (bar  Chalafta},  a  Tana  33 
Jose  (bar  Zabda),    Pal 

Amora    , 
Jose,  a  Babyl.  Amora 
Jose,  the  Galilean 
Jose  b.  Juda 
Joseph  (bar  Chiya) 
Joshua  (b.  Chanania) 
Joshua  b.  Korcha 
Joshua  b.  Levi 
Juda  b.  Baba 
Juda  b.  Bathyra  . 
Juda  Hanasi  (= Rabbi) 
Juda  II  (Nesiah)  . 
Juda  (b.  Ilai)  Tana 
Juda  (b.  Jecheskel),  Babyl 

Amora  » 


L.-M. 


48 
55 
30 
38 
49 
26 
35 
43 
80 
27 
37 
41 
33 


46 


Levi  (bar  Sissi)    .        .  43 

Mar  bar  Rab  Ashe       .  53 

Maremar  (=Mar  Jemar}  53 

Mathia  b.  Charash        .  30 

Meir       ....  31 

Nachman  (bar  Jacob)  47 

Nachman  b.  Isaac        .  50 

Nachum  the  Median  .  25 

Nachum  of  Gimzo        .  27 

Nathan  (the  Babylonian)  36 

Nechemia      ...  35 

Nechunia  b.  Hakana    .  27 

O.— R 


Page. 
Rabba  bar  Hun  a  .        .  49 

Rabba  (bar  Nachmani)  49 

Rabba  bar  bar  Ghana.  47 

Rabba  of  Tusfah  (or  Tospia)  54 
Rabbi  (=Juda  Hanasi)  37 

Rabbina  I  and  II.  .  54 

Rafram  bar  Papa         .  53 

Rafram  II.  .        .  53 

Resh  Lakish  (  =  R.  Simon  b. 
Lakish)    ,        .        .  43 


S. 


Sama  bar  Rabba  . 

53 

Samuel  (Mar] 

44 

Samuel  bar  Abbuha      . 

55 

Saphra  .... 

45 

Shamai  .... 

23 

Shela     .... 

44 

Shesheth-       . 

46 

Simai  bar  Ashe    . 

51 

Simlai    .... 

43 

Simon  bar  Abba  . 

45 

Simon  b.  Elazar  . 

38 

Simon  b.  Gamaliel  I.  24 

Simon  b.  Gamaliel  II.  35 

Simon  (ben  Jochai]      .  33 

Simon  b.  Lakish  .        .  42 

Simon  ben  Nanos.         .  30 

Symmachos  (or  Symchos)  37 

T.— Z. 


v-'. XV. 

Tarphon  (or,  Tryphon) 

28 

Oshaya  (or  Hoshaya) 

39 

Ukba(Mar)     . 

44 

Papa 

51 

Ulla  (bar  Ishmael)        . 

47 

Papi 

51 

Zadok  (Tzadok) 

26 

Plimo    . 

39 

Zebid 

53 

Rab  (=Abba  Aricha) 

43 

Zera  (Zeira)  . 

46 

Raba      ,        .        • 

50 

Zutra  (Mar}  . 

53 

INDEX  OF  EXPLAINED  TECHNICAL  TERMS  AND 
PHRASES. 


Page. 

Page. 

217.233    . 

.   ""i^D^lOp    *S03 

.s 

210 

iSn^n^jD 

256 

.  nn-nx 

157 

ns  r^n 

2U4 

.     x^^nx 

159 

Drains  ^:^i2  nx  r:2 

244 

xcbi  ^x 

244 

.     s'yn 

253 

x»D^*j'n  nicx  \s 

244 

n^ro  'D2 

230 

-iDnx  'DHi^nx  'X 

202 

.    ND^L"3 

244 

in^  x'yn'x 

253 

iDxn  ixfob  xrD^L'o 

239 

.    xo'X  n'yTX 

210 

.    r['i2r\2 

259 

245 

no::'D  '\ir{  'V2i  ina 

259 

xn\x  \s^  'Dr\  ^x 

227 

n^DI  Np  N^D^N  X13J 

243 

.      ...  ^X1  . .  'X 

223 

Ni:i:i 

217 

.     in^'ra  xrx 

143 

.rwi^  mr: 

229 

nDXi  xp'X 

249 

.     nnoj 

200.204.24 

0          .             .    XD^^'X 

148 

0  -irr: 

257 

X2'D    X»2^X 

252 

n-DX  \si 

237            1 

...xn^  ^rx 

251 

^DH  X?3'n  xS  \S1 

135 

\nr^  \D  i'w':iy  px 

252 

-]ny-i  xp'^D  ^xi 

218 

.     T^'X 

225 

.  iiTinn  ^nrixi 

256 

.x-innoD  X2-:'X 

250 

. .  ."1  xnjn 

228 

iT3'ri'X 

174 

ir:yD  nct^n  -i^n 

240 

xSx 

133 

in  ,;n 

209 

XO'X  xj^x 

181 

,   s-inx3  ^pixi  n:?o  ;n 

253 

.     D"L"  '.XS  K>X 

y^rroi?  X2'^  xnrD  x'^x 
.  xn"ii"in»D  xSx 

254 

n^m 

257 

134 

.    "iDi  |nn  jo  XD^  VT 

240 

249 

.     xpri 

260 

nnyr  xSx 

197 

.    nnyn 

205 

.     X-'^X 

247.253 

.^pj  xpn 

213 

.     ;x»:x 

238 

.  n^  nxp  ^XD  n^  nxpi 

185 

113 

c'-n 

223 

I'D  n^X 

229 

x:':n  '^2:  i:x  ^,x 

.n 

210 

1'TJVX 

14S 

...*:  x'nx 

21  :i 
226 

nSy  ^^-Dx  xn 

224.225 

22'J 

i*rr,x 

23S 

.^s^D  \s*n 

258          h 

;n\^-i3  xni  xn^snD  xn 

.1—3 

203.257 

.  ''y^  NH 

133 

ym  ]r2  xnn 

107 

.  i2vnD 

257 

.  wn  ^Nn  *D  -iDXT  xin 

200.243 

.     ;:Tcy  'x^3 

284 


Index  of  Technical  Terms  and  Phrases. 


Page. 

Page. 

240 
213 

242 
211 

259 

.  iDyoi?! 

238 

•         ♦         •  n3  ^"in 

218 
218 

..b  n^i?  n^bi 

238 
207.208 

.    nviin 

.      1J^\T  ...1J>\T 

225 

.  n)^r2  nn  iddi 

216 

.  i<^P  N:n  ij>M 

227 

.     on  n»x  '•Di 

200.242 

••loi  o\n 

247 

fc<-iD'n  Njoi 

152.250 

>7       rrpDj;  ^ND3  N3n 

218 

'£3 1301 

200.241.2^ 

212 

.      ""Dn^fl 

207 

7'Dp  Nnm  X3n 

215.222 

.  Mrcni 

198 

i»ij-in  N3n 

147 

.    '131  |n3n  3m 

258 

xnsj'n  on 

239 

ini 

247.252 

N"i3nDo  ^Dj  on 

213 

.   CN3^^3x!3ini 

209 

■)ONp  on 

201 

.   fc<3n»  n^  ^n^^c  N:m 

56 

.     n3bn 

238.256 

«-i3Dni 

123 

^roo  n^^o!?  n3bn 

•»— T 

243 

n^NT  iNDb  Nn>^n 

* 

160 

|n3K>  nisj'n  nvn 

206 

nioiN  n&«T 

212.251 

...Dnn  noi  Nntj'n 

157 

3Nn:3  nr 

199 

i-iroN*  Dnn 

147 

^^{U  IT  r]2'^  n\-i  it 

258 

.  ...N3n  ...Dnn 

196 

IT  iDib  -|nv  PNI  IT 

202 

••Np  Dnn 

235 

"i»N  ini  "iDN  in 

182 

jnn  iTn 

.1 

209  214     , 

.  NiDn^omon 

233 

.  in^oyto^nTKi 

193.247    . 

DyD 

254 

•  •miiDN^Ni 

206.250    . 

...n   N^VD 

254 

.  inn  «p^D  ^Ni 

137 

ptj'  n^3v  - 

231 

"in^Ni 

192 
143 
246 

Don  n^n^ 

tr-iiBcn  p  Dino  nob^ 

1J3-I  i:nDi)^ 

260 
225 
259 

.ND^n^Ni 

158 

...  Kr 

213 

"NDNI 

^—3 

254 

Nn^N  DX1 

215 

.     ...1X31  ...  |N3 

225 
240 

250 

.  ...oj  }n3E^Nn3 

'yb^  i6  ...N3M  i^3 
.          i)^3 

245 

IDlb  N"iDn  DN1 

232 
163 

205 
260 

164 

tO"1D1^S3 

214 

.   Nsj'n  n-iDNni 

166 

205 

...tj^Nini 

167 

233 

..n  n^nio  xn^Sni 

256 
219 

221 
lb2 

.   N^jnni  ,pnni 
pnn  iTni 

Index  of  Technical  Terms  and  Phrases. 


285 


Page. 

Page. 

159 

irvD  nn 

235 

"Kjna 

243 

"jti'Dj  no 

224 

pox  n;i 

218 

n^'^^n  nsSmD 

160 

.  'm  n]  nn  nS 

151 

.    njDiD 

226 

"iDHN  'j'n^cn  in;? 

191.217    . 

.  npi^no 

196 

IT  fix  IT  wS*':? 

260 

^"D  ND'K  ^D 

196 

-iDNp  N'y2;o  nS 

244 

pnrrx  'D 

260 

inyi  sp^D  nS 

258 

Nns  n^o 

200.210.243                      NDnV   nS 

250 

nim  n^D 

239 

N^'iTP  to 

258 

.    'Dl  ^D 

224 

i:l"  nS 

224 

.    X"iO'D 

194 

"NO  'insS 

259 

.  sn^:  'D 

219 

liE-n  xb 

256 

.m3D  ^D 

233 

n^oyo^ 

206.249    . 

bbD^ 

203.217. 2S 

5          .             .       XO'S 

133 

nc^D 

234 

"x^n^  xo^S 

247 

n^  N'ros  n:d 

234 

n^^  x^'ycp  xo'S 

200 

.       ^h'D  '^n  iXJD 

197 

nynriDS 

947 

xiD^n  N30 

199 

.     xn^Si  \xoS 

2CJ> 

.    n^DCiDT  p 

244 

nro  xpcj  'xob 

195 

■•Diyob  Nr^JD 

218 

xno'oS 

203 

:r^"':nD  ^jo 

195 

"XD  ^tD^yoS 

200 

.       ' '      ^^^ 

200.243 

D^iy^ 

201.238     , 

pjc  ;':::j:' 

.D 

255 

H'^J  T'^'O 

i 

247.252     . 

fc^lDnOD 

198 

.         .      ^xo 

193 

.    nc'VD 

24o 

"ID'D?  X3'X  \X0 

214 

.    n^nob  nc'vo 

232 

in'^ri  \xo 

193 

Kny^vo 

201 

soyo  \xo 

193 

;n?Di  NL"D 

249 

X-)  'XO 

222.241     . 

.    ^2'n'D  ,3^nD 

199 

.      X"^o>.:;  \s^ 

220 

.  jn^jnD  xn^jno 

199 

yor^D  ^xo 

255 

ni)  Pivno 

199.223 

^ox:5  'xo 

199.210 

.y- 

-.: 

142 

n^Dp  'xr^ 

132 

.      inj 

208 

.  x:m  XJL"  \so 

247 

.  pwX  ^rnj 

213.217     . 

.  XL"n  x;l"  WD 

234 

\SJnD  ND^J 

255 

n3  fin:D 

249 

.    irt^p: 

122 

xn^mxno 

193.248    . 

.      N-13D 

123 

nno 

133 

.    pfllD 

118 

n^Sii  m:x  l*'^t3 

343 

.  Cl^D  cin 

244 

ino 

233 

Kny^D  ,vrD 

210 

x*:'m  ir^jo 

193 

ND'D 

157 

nnvj  ...no 

286 


Index  of  Technical  Terms  and  Phrases. 


Page. 

Page. 

206.249    . 

n^ro  v»K^ 

211 

n^b  NDntDVN  NB^D 

206 

IT'rD  DV^^ 

209.238 

"inyn  xpbo 

224        .        NnnvDE^  xnynsj^ 

210 

NrDN  -inyn  xp^o 

241 

.     i<')Tii^ 

177 

.  r^ioD 

241 

Np^m  i^^)y^ 

191 

.        .      DriD 

160        inxD  n^Nnn  DuinD  ^2^ 

217 

Wt^  iO  |ND  IV 

175      T"5^T  D'^EJ'^n^Dn  D^niDD  ^JK^ 

132 

.     N:m  N-ip^y 

252 

.     -^'z^ 

216 

n^b  ^^i^\>  "^'str 

.n— .3 

193.261     . 

.     i<nDi  i6\)^ 

242 

.  Npn^e 

233 

rctj>  Nn 

136.254 

.     ND-i^Q 

214 

.    Ni3n 

193 

.  Nnii^Q 

247 

ynn 

255 

ins 

132 

pn  n^^nn 

243 

(pIBD)  p-»D 

228.233.241.254  . 

^■nnvn 

245 

.Nnn  Nn?D  tDitJ'Q 

243 

.  -2  nrn 

117 

Nip-i  ^^DE^'D  ,Dti^3 

245 

ip^n 

209 

239 

.     fn^n 

210 

238 

.   nn^cn 

207 

..3  D^'Di  ..3  nna 

220.221    . 

N:n 

160 

.  |^aEJ'mE^'mv 

220 

Cpn)  ^112  Kjn 

211 

.    NDnv 

202 

^t^p  N'j'n  &<in 

212 

.     "^nv 

195 

n^^Kn  N*jn 

209 

.      ^JD^  p^D2  Np 

191 

Nop  Njn 

239 

"loim  ^p 

235.257     . 

NM  \v:n 

130 

222 

pm  ijn 

124.183     . 

Dty^o^  ^m 

221 

N^:n 

240 

.    n'i:>M 

223.229    . 

.     ^DH  ^Dj  N^jn 

207 

.  Nnm 

222.235    . 

n^m^  N^:n 

192 

.     NK'n 

221 

Nnn  >:n 

258 

^..NB^Di ...  NtJ^n 

220.228     . 

►  T'm  nb  NJ^jn 

.n— .^ 

222 

220 
236 

(Dnn)  pn 
.  D'l^nDn 

241.257    . 
246 

(Dnn)  N3n  ^:)NtJ^ 
DnD  in!?ty 

246 

APPENDIX, 


KEY  TO  THE  ABBREVIATIONS  USED  IN  THE  TALMUD 
AND  ITS  COMxMENTARIES. 


on  ij^3-i  "iDX  .n"ix 

(in  Tosaphoth) 

.n 

DIN  'n  .3x  pn  .N"3 

^N^L"^  pi<n  ."'"Nn 

•'""'  nnx  nna  " 

n^na  "^^2  .njn  12  -13  .n"3n 

Cj^npDn  nn  -^^n  n^i  .n"3 
Nin  inn  .n^3n  bv^ 

m^n:i  nn'7n3  .y'ns, 

(in  Tosaphoth) 

DDJDn  n^n  o"n3 
t^Tpr^n  n^n.p"cn3 


N'N 


Cnn)  n  px  .m^^r^  ndw 

ND\S*  n'V2  \x 

nnry  p  iiyi^x 

|1L"N-in  DIN 

nmiN 

D^iyn  n^oiN 
■•d:  'dh  pn 

DN1  2X 

"inNi  nnN 

D^iyn  n-^n^N 

t^'s:  Sdin 

nr  nN 

D^^nniiN  .T^n  irN 

nr  nnN 

IDinN 

Sn^l" 


PN 


NC)\^  n^y3  \x 


Onb) 


p  DN 

nbn^n  nD:3  'L":n 

|N3  2'nD  PN 

N?:;Sy  'Si2N 
(inS )  n'S  ~rrN 
n^S  n\^:  .N»:'i^  \s 

^3n  ND^n  nS  'n 

T^  "ICN 

^nn  p 12N 
D^yn  i^^D  irn^N 


.3"NN 
0"NN 

.n"N 

•  N"2N 
.T'3N 

.y"2N 

.T'N 

.'-nN 

.n"N 

.:"r:N 
•nV'n 
.nV'n 
.ymN 
.:""iN 

.n"N 

.T"nN 
.r"nN 

"N 
N'2'N 

N"y2\s 

.3"N 

.yrcN 

.3"2N 

.y'TN 


^" 


N 


iTTiSn 

.n"cN 
.n^cN 


288 


Key  to  Abbreviations  in  the  Talmud. 


Kj^ox  n)n^ 

.K^m 

^aniK^i  . 

r'i62 

inn  xim 

.n"m 

Ny^VO  K33 

.0"2 

n^^  mm 

.V'm 

irvD  nD3 

.o"Dn 

nD''»b  n^h  r])ni 

.V6m 

ni:iTD  ^rD  K-in 

" 

^VD  n^ri"] 

.D"m 

pn  jn^n 

.n"jn 

-iD^»b  ^VD  r^^r^'^ 

.b"i2ni 

K^Dij'n  Nny^Dn 

.T'Dn 

-IDKP  >Dm 

*P"r]i 

n^nn  bya 

.n"y2 

«dSu  1^131 

.y'DT 

(in  Tosaph.)  D^n  mryn 

.n"y3 

niiioD  "n 

.D"n 

mn  D^iyn 

•fnyi 

10ST  jSOl 

.T'Dl 

ima  byn 

o"yn 

«Dyi3  ^Nnm 

tSMDl 

na^jya 

.B"y3 

DipD  bon 

.D"Dn 

noiK  ns  Kin 

.K"Dn 

niK'Bi  ^n 

.yn 

Dnm  ^jsai  ana:  ^jd2  .y'sai  j"s3 

n^j^o  span 

.rD":n 

KDP  Kn3 

.P"3 

DnsiD  nm 

.D'n 

^NDK>  nu 

.K'^n 

in-i3  byn 

o"yn 

DnDIK  \SDE^  n^3 

.K^sj'n 

D^^D  Sa  byi 

.D"Dyn 

.n  DK^3 

.r^2 

|b  Ko^-^n 

•V'^pn 

J 

"nnyn  spbo  xpn 

.T'Dpn 

mm  n  ,mm  131 

.n"n 

(in  Rashi)  KjnnK  KDl^i 

.N"i 

.p3-i  ijm 

.n'^m 

in  -iTi 

.n"j 

ntj'in  n^:i 

.yn: 

•n 

ntD: 

.T"3 

ni5J^  mn: 

.JJ^"M 

K^DK  mn 

.K"n 

(in  Marginal   DB^  nt  Ui 

« 

muyn  xnn 

.yn"3n 

Notes) 

Dnon  ni!?^»i 

Kin  inn  cj'npn 

.n"3n 

.n"3 

jrpoy  ^KD3  i<Dn 

.y"nn 

non^j  ,KD"i^j 

.'^5 

(in  Rashi)  ]rD'M  nn 

pDi 

Kn»3 

••oi  'yn 

.IM 

niny  ^i^j  .py  p 

.y": 

Kin  nn  .pn  Kin 

.n"n 

D^oys ': 

.a"j 

nman  Kin  K-in 

.n"nn 

HDi:  .Di: 

nj 

^vtt  nin 

.»"in 

niK'  mn:i 

.Ey"j 

nrnn 

.T"n 

n»i3  |OTn 

.y'rn 

•T 

KDyo  ^Kn 

.i3"n 

nnK  nni 

.K'n 

n^b  nin 

.^'n 

ntJ^QK  ^KT 

.K"Kn 

n^Sn 

.6n 

p  K^  Dxn 

O'^Kl 

iD'-Db  n^S  nin 

.b'6n 

^anKomK^^Nn.nfn^Ki 

^roD  nc^D^  nD^n 

.D"bn 

niDi^j  Kvon  Dxn 

.y'riKn 

^v»  nin  .'•b^o  ^jn 

.o"n 

^Dn  iNb:n  .; 

l"t621 

IDK  riKT  no  i^n 

.K'non 

ij^nnon  im 

.n'n 

iD^D^)  ^VD  nin 

J>"Dn 

(in  Marginal  Notes) 

Key  to  Abbreviations  in  the  Talmud. 


289 


p\>h  r^yi  .b^yb  r^yi 
niy  r^xn 

(in  Tosaphoth)  nti'P  Tiyi 
(in  Tosaphoth)  |vy  "invi 

(in  Marginal  pDJ  DK^ 
Notes) 

.t 

m  nx  m  .nr  nnx  m 

nnm 

nn  nr 

Dn^a  nn  nr 

nann^J  (djiidt)  ij;i3T 

"ijic^b  nr 

V3S3  K^EJ'  D-ixb  r^T 

nt  Dy  m  .nr  bv  nr 
3inDn  ■lrDNt^'  nr 

.n 

nyiDH  bin 

D1bt^'1  on 

psS  nvin 

nyiD  btJ*  i5?in 

HD-inb  DJ"n3T  iro3n 

nvnb  bn 

pxb  pn 

lOECJ'o  ;:^"in 

^anp  'am  xnono  mon 

dt:  ^vn 


.y"yi 
.p"yT 
.y"yi 
.V'^p-i 
.V'pi 


.far 

.T"1T 

o"nT 

II 

.T"yT 
.n"K^T 


.N"n 

.Dn"n 

•V'n 

.b'"in 

.D":i"in 

.^''Tn 

.N"Dn 

.^n 

u 

.D"n 

.p"mDn 

.y'n 

.V':^'n 

.p^it^'n 


vSy  n^^no  s^vicn 
n^«in 

nbyoS  "lON^n 

K-innoD  ^d:  ^3n 
Nnn  D^iyn  | 
nrn  oSiyn 

Dm:  men 
pt:pn  .T\^'^7\ 

Nin  1113  mpn 

n"iiJi2->3  nn3iy  3-in 
.-|">3n^  D:^^^ 

.1 


.n^yon 

.D"jn 
// 

.3n"yn 

3n"iyn 

.T"myn 

.D"n 

.y'cn 
.'pn 

.^"^ 
.n"3pn 

.3"-in 
.3"yin 

.'>";rn 


ND\Sn^y3^X1    .N"3N1 

-iDNnnxi  ^y^ 

'\o'\y\  -"131 

Sp  Nvom  p^ni  .p''ni 

(in  Commentaries) 

p-in  Nim  .n^ni 

KoSy  1S3S1  •y"^-'^ 

^3n  DiK'C^  .n"rDi 

-l3D  "IDT  •D"D1 


290 


Key  to  Abbeeviations  in  the  Talmud. 


••b  HN-i:  p 
D^Cys  HDD  .^r^D  ^D 

nrn^  -[>-iv  p 

PK'  b  N^ 
n^^  n^b  .^^  nob 

Nan  D^iy^ 
,    Syi) 

Cin  Commentaries)    f 

?Dpb 

n^Dj^  nS 
y"in  ns*>^ 


.y"3 
.a"py3 


.N'6 

.D"nnb 
.y"::S 

♦n"nyb 
.r"yb 

'>yb 

.S"yb 

♦^''jys:? 

.p';b 
.o"p!5 
.£*»";, 


iny  jn^JiK^i  -iid 

(in  Marg.  Notes) 

•laiD  myD 

(na)  n6y> 
innin  n^ 


inain  ^n> 
y"in  iv^ 

NJ11J  'NHD 

bnjn  pa 
|or  ba  .nr  b 


.y"K>iD 


o"nv 
.D"r 

.t^"y> 
r"njp> 


// 


»3  Name  of  Joseph  Karo's  Commentary  on  the  code  of  Maimonides. 


Key  to  Abbreviations  in  the  Talmud. 


291 


DyD  inij 

.D": 

Dn^  nb'D: 

.>": 

.V': 

'b  nx-ij 

'y 

nj''D  Np3J 

.0"J 

D^c  pr: 

.K^"J 

.i3tj'  ^<&^'1J  .nasj'  nj 

41 

.D 

•Njnnx  N>:i^D 

.X"D 

Dnnx  DnsD 

<' 

mvi  Np^D 

.T'D 

NroK  inn  Npbo 

.N"1D 

b'nriDn  -im  c|id 

.n"-iD 

n-i^Di  -n^D 

.»"1D 

p>D 

•  '^D 

.T^  N-l^DD 

.b"D 

(in  t^nj  mVD  "I2D 

.y'DD 

Marginal  Notes)  ^) 

ni::*2j  PDD 

y'D 

f  pQD  pEJD  .ejlD  ^)D 

.D"D 

Cj^yo 

^yo 

p-lS  Pj^D 

.D"D 

Nina  p-i2  pjiD 

.3"SD 

NDp  p12  C^ID 

.p"£:D 

mimsD 

.n"D 

nmiD  pb^sn  onsD 

.D"nD 

.J7 

•noy  .py 
D^TPN*  muy 

.'y 

.N"y 

'N  n^oy 

// 

no3i  no3  nnx  ^y 

.V':Dxy 

.'3  nioy 

.a"y 

3J  by 

o"y 

Dii)K^n  vi)y  .pNH  Dy 

.*i"y 

K3n  Di)iy 

.n"my 

.D 

njK>D 

.'D 

.X"D 

.:^"ND 

Dv  n^yzD 

.'"ynD 

Tn^T  ^NO  .IDNT  |ND 

.T'D 

DnaiD  nnnD 

.D"nD 

^DH  mL*'c  .D\in:nD 

.n"D 

pnn  m-D 

•T'nD 

^b^o  ^:n  NJD 

.D"nQ 

^ro  inD 

.D"nD 

m:^^^  ^dx^o 

.K'"no 

minn  |d 

.n"nD 

-iniD 

.'DID 

"1DCD1  npD 

•D'MD 

in^i  N^ro 

II 

(in  Marginal  nt  priD 

.T"D 

notes) 

pxS  nvino 

.S"nD 

NDyt2  \so 

.D"D 

"13D  -ID 

.D"D 

ni^y  mvo 

.y"D 

nyb  nyo 

.^"yD 

jt:p  -lyio 

.p"D 

D'on^  mo 

.T'D 

nn-i  L'niD 

" 

Dik"n  v^y  ):2i  n::'D 

.n"y-iD 

nriD:;'  no  .njc  \xd 

.•J'"D 

n3:^'  ^nvio  .^x"  nryo 

// 

^DH  D1L"D 

.n"rD 

mL"D 

'K"D 

(niDDina)  n^n^L"  n^D 

.n"'L'*D 

n-i^n  ;no 

•n'  D 

|n':nD 

.'^:nD 

.: 

NjnnN  xnoij 

.X"J 

n'V3  2nDj 

.3": 

nDi:n  -ij 

.n": 

»)  Name  of  annotations  to  Alfasi's  Talnnidical  compondiuni  by 
R.  Joseph  b.  Chabiba,  often  referred  to  in  Tosaphoth  Yonitov  (  Heller). 

')  Name  of  the  rabbinical  code  by  R.  Moses  of  Coucy.  It  is  di- 
vided into  p8j>y  commendatory,  and  p^iK^  prohibitory  laws. 


292 


Key  to  Abbreviations  in  the  Talmud. 


.:; 

D^^n  i?yn  -lyv 

.n"3V 

nMi^n  nv 

.n"^ 

inntr  niK'mv 

.K^"nv 

nvrh  inv  noib  ^nv 

•b")i 

•ivy  yi)i 

•P 
minn  nxnp 

.y"v 

.n"np 

"iDim  bp  ■ 

•n  ip 

]b  ND^^p 

,b"^p 

pnb  bp 

y? 

p  yotJ'D  xp 

.y'op 

inyn  np^d  np 

.n"Dp 

jvy  "inv  nvp 

♦y"vp 

D^K^np  ^j^np 

'P''P 

(in  Tosaph.)  nt^'p  nvp 

.yo^  n^np 

3-1  ."1-1 

iry^N  '1  .nty^^N  "m 
nnry  p  iry^x  "ii 

D^iy  b^  1D13-I 

^N^brD:  p-i 
{<jin  n-i  •njc'n  e^«i 

D^n-in  nic'i 

.nrjn  "31  /N^^n  "3-> 
snon  3-1 
(n"iSDin3)  ^NJjn  1:3-1 

N3X  -13  N""n  "31 
pSltD  "3-1 

vmn'  '1  .n-nn"  "3-1 
pn^*"'-i  .pm"  '1 


.E^'^'p 


.'-I 

.y"3N-i 

.n"33-) 
•y  K*3-i 

.:"-! 

.n"i 

.""n-i 

.-I'Mi 

.n"-i 


.N"3n-i 


nrn  obiy 

n-iT  mi3y  .nr  by 

nnvn  "3ny 

n"by 

C  3py"  py 

3113  D1"  3-iy 

iDii)E^"niy 

^53  by  ,;s<3  ny 

in-i3  by 

"jy:3  n3y 

v-13-t  |«3  ly 

niblDI  D"3D3  13iy 

ijiK^b  |N3  ny 

D"JD  b3  by 

b"yb  |""y 

mo  by 

iiy  |""y  ."i3y  n3y 

D"b"b«  muy  "-i3iy 

D"nDa  "3-iy  ,"d  by 

n^trn  E^Ni  3-iy 

C'-iin  sj'X-i  3iy 

Dt:'  }""y  ,n32j>  3-iy 

l"D"inn  uny 


.T"y 
.n"y 

.b""y 
.3"y 

»/ 

.n"3y 

.D"i3y 

.b"3y 

.B"3y 

.b"y 

.N"yy 

.Q"y 

.n"-iy 

.n"-iy 

.B^"y 

.n"y 


.s 

nK>-iD  .p-iQ 
.'N  p-iD  .nnx  Dy£5 
.'3  p-iD  .j<-in3  p-iD 

(in  To-  DllDJipn  K^n"3 
saphot  referring  to  Rashi) 

piDD 
|"-r  pDQ 

KOp  p"1D  I 
(in  Tosaplioth) 

Dn  i:3i  ::n"a 

(in  Tosaph oth) 


.3"Q 

.p"Q 
.p"-iD 

.n"nB 


^)  En  Jacob  to  which  sometimes  references  are  made  in  the 
marginal  notes  to  the  Talmud  is  the  name  of  a  collection  of  all  Agadic 
passages  of  the  Talmud.  See  above  p.  76. 

^')  Frequently  occurring  in  Tosaphoth  Yom  Tob  (^Heller)  and 
referring  to  the  Mishna  Commentary  by  R.  Obadja  Bertmoro. 


Key  to  Abbkeviations  in  the  Talmud. 


293 


niDS>n=DmDn5;'K' 

.D"K^ 

Dnny  nnnK^ 

.y"K' 

'^^')V  ]rh^ 

// 

D"n  mix  ^ny  \rhiy 

.n"K  y"B^ 

iryn  pN  iny  |nbtj'.y"nK  y"K^ 

nyi  mv  ^ny  jn^t^ 

.T"V  y"K^ 

tDEKn:  jsrin  -jny  jn^sr 

D"n  ]}"^ 

K'l^DB^ 

.'D6J' 

ntsns  mc^ 

.E)"K^ 

iiTV  n^^Jtr 

.V"K^ 

iDi^  ^:iv-ifij^ 

.^'V-IK^ 

TDK^  "IDIK^  .D"'D6^  DtJ' 

.K^"B^ 

inntr  "itoK' 

// 

.n 

.n"B^ 

.N"n 

/« 

3X3  ny^'n 

.3"n 

D^non  n^nn 

.n"n 

imn  nbsn 

// 

iK^yDi  nonn 

.D"in 

msDin 

.'Din 

wnn  ^:n  .nsn  n^D^n 

.n"n 

injin^  Di:-in 

^"n 

D^JU'^  niDDin 

w 

ait:  Dv  msDin 

.t3"^n 

D^jHD  min 

.3"n 

^D3  ^DI^JK^n 

II 

inn  n2  iin 

.T'an 

D^aina  d^n^j  min 

T'jn 

iDib  Dobn 

o"n 

nn  ^DJ  K^:n 

.n"jn 

Nop  ^<Jn 

.p"n 

■no  fc<Dp  Kjn 

.D"pn 

lu^v  njyn 

.v"n 

p3"i  nn 

.T'n 

nnsj'  Dinn  .yct^'  N*n 

.sj*";! 

nc  bynt^  mm 

.Q"y3rn 

.mvi  niobn 

.n"n 

^NDT  p  pnv  '-I 

.T"3n 

')b  p  y-iTin^  'T 

.b"3n 

NJHD  3") 

.3"1 

s^'^p^  K'n 

.V'1 

i^ND  '1 

.D"-l 

pm  31  -inj  '1 

.y'"i 

N3^py  '1 

.y"i 

pID  K>n  .NDD  '-I 

.D"-| 

pyoc'  '1 

.::'"-i 

iry^N  p  pyD^i^  'i 

.i<"3C^-| 

Dm3N  p  pt^D^  1J31 

u 

(mDDin3) 

^Nnv  p  pyot>>  '1 

.^"3-^n 

bi<'b^i  p  pyo^r  "i 

.yii^fi 

I^ND  p  bxiDK^  "l 

.D"3Ci 

(mQDin3) 

''pnT  HD^Sr  1^31 

.-•"lin 

m3m  ^C'N-l 

.n"i 

(niDDin3)  ,Dn  )m 

.n"i 

.ir 

IK'DK  ^NK* 

N'X'J* 

n  pn::^ 

.3"n:;' 

HK^yo  13  PNC 

.D"3N*J' 

p  N^  DNC 

.3"^yj' 

inv  irxc 

•V'XtJ' 

.ID  !3y3K^ 

.D"y3:y 

D^»nn3^DK^.^oiTs:r 

.1":;' 

no-i3  p]n\:^ 

.yr.Tj^ 

Dn^cn  -i^*j^ 

.C'ne' 

nuicni  ni^ws*:^ 

.n"itr 

nvnS  Sn-j^ 

.V'nL" 

3in  -it^t:^ 

.n"t:L- 

13  K'^C' 

.3"'L" 

n^ro  yoK^ 

.D":^ 

y-lD  3^3 -j^ 

14 

DIpD  ^3d:^ 

.d"d:^ 

IDNJK^  1 

Typographical  Work  of  A.  Qi&ib«rs. 


294 


ADDENDA 

to 

p.  11.  Baha  Kama.  As  to  particulars  concerning  this  and  the  two 
following  Masechtoth,  see  the  articles  Baba  Kamma,  Baba 
Mezia  and  Baba  Batra,  in  the  Jewish  Encyclopedia,  vol.  II. 

p.   12.    Eduyoth.    See  Herman  Klueger,  Ueber  die  Genesis  und  Com- 
position der  Halachasammlung  Edujoth,  Berlin,  1898. 
Ahoda  Zara.    See   article  Abodah  Zarah  in  Jewish  Encyclo- 
pedia, vol.  I. 

Ahotli.     See  article  Abot  in  Jewish  Encyclopedia,  vol.  I. 
Arachin.     See  article  'Arakin  in  Jewish  Encyclopedia,  vol.  II. 

p.    15.    Addition  to  Bibliography  in  the  foot  note  :  F.  Hillel,Die  Nom- 
inal bildungen  in  der  Mischna.     Frankf.  o.  M.,  1891. 
H.  Sachs,  Die  Partikel  der  Mischna,  Berlin,  1897. 

p.   22.    On  the  Zugoth,  see  Frankel,  Monatschrift  1852,  pp.  405-421. 

p.  29.  R.  Akiba.  As  to  fuller  characteristics  of  this  teacher,  see 
article  Akiba  ben  Joseph,  in  Jewish  Encyclopedia,  vol.  I. 

p.  40.  Expounders  of  the  Mishna.  See  the  article  Amora  in  Jew- 
ish Encyclopedia,  vol.  I. 

p.  43.  R.  Joshua  h,  Levi.  I.  H.  Weiss,  in  his  Dor  Dor  III,  p.  60, 
proves  that  Levi,  the  father  of  this  Amora,  was  not  the 
celebrated  Levi  bar  Sissi,  and  that  there  were  two  teachers 
by  the  name  of  Joshua  b.  Levi. 

Abba  Areca.  See  article  Abba  Arika,  in  Jewish  Encyclopedia, 
vol.  I. 

R.  Abbahu.  See  S.  Perlitz'  monograph  on  Rabbi  Abahu  in 
Monatschrift  XXXVI  (1887);  also  article  Abbahu  in  Jewish 
Encyclopedia,  vol.  I, 

Rab  Nachman  b.  Jacob.  I.  H.  Weiss,  in  his  Dor  Dor,  contra- 
dicts the  generally  accepted  statement  that  Rab  Nachman 
had  an  academy  in  Shechan-Zib. 

Abaye.  There  was  another  Amora  by  that  name  who  flour- 
ished in  a  former  generation,  and  is  characterized  as  Abaye 
the  elder;  see  Jebamoth  24  a. 

Rab  Ashe.    As  to  fuller  characteristics  of  this  distinguished 
Amora,  see  in  Jewish  Encyclopedia,  article  Ashi,  vol.  II. 
Aboth  d' Rabbi  Natha7i.     See  article  under   that   heading  in 
Jewish  Encyclopedia,  vol.  I. 

End  of  §  41.  See  M.  Jastrow,  The  History  and  the  Future  of 
the  talmudic  text.     Philadelphia,  1897. 


p- 

45. 

p. 

47. 

p- 

49. 

p- 

51. 

p- 

63. 

p- 

80. 

Addenda.  295 

p.  81.  6.  K^Tnn  Tliy.  Aramaeisch-Neuhebraeisches  Woerterbuch  zu 
Targum,  Talmud  and  Midrasch,  by  G.  II.  Dalman.  Frankf.  o. 
M.  1901. 

p.  82.  Grammars.  M.  Schlesinger,  Das  arain.  Verbum  ini  Jerusale- 
mischen  Talmud.     Berlin,  1899. 

G. Dalman,  Grammatik  des  juedisch  palastinischen  Aramaeisch 
Nach  den  Idiomen  des  palast.  Talmud  und  Midrasch.  Leip- 
zig, 1894. 

p.  85.  H.  Graetz  An  English  translation  of  the  whole  work  of  this 
historian  has  lately  been  published  by  the  Jewish  Publication 
Society  of  America.  The  Talmudical  period  is  treated  es- 
pecially in  Vol.  II.     Philadelphia,  1S93. 

p.  87.  Similar  to  D''JVV,  but  more  complete  is  the  book  D''?^D^p:^•7  "iVIN 
by  Kalman  Perla.  Warsaw,  1900. 

p.  88.  Translations  of  the  Talmud.  See  E.  Bischoff  Kritische 
Geschichte  der  Talmuduebersetzungen.      Frankf.  o.  M.  1899. 

p.  90.  Latin  Translations  of  Single  Maskchtotii.  //.  S.  Hirch- 
field  Tractatus  Maccoth  cum  Scholiis  hermeneuticis,  etc.  Ber- 
lin, 1842. 

German  Translations,  add:  Laz.  Goldschmidt.  Der  Babyl. 
Talmud  herausgegeben  nach  der  ersten  Zensurfreien  Eom- 
bergschen  Ausgabe  moeglischst  sinn — und  wortgetreu  ueber- 
eetzt  und  mit  kurzen  Anmerkungen  verschen.  Vol.  I  u.  III. 
Berlin,  1897-99. 

M.  Eawicz.  Der  Tractat  Kethuboth  uebersetzt.  Frankf.  o. 
M.  1898,  1900. 

p.   92.    d.    English  Translations. 

Michael  L.  Rodkinson  is  publishing  The  Babylonian  Talmud, 
translated  into  English  (partly  abridged),  of  which  the  follow- 
ing volumes  appeared:  volumes  I  and  IT,  Sabbath;  volume 
III,Erubiii;  volume  IV^,Shekalim  and  Rosh-IIashana  ;  volume 
V,  Pesachim  ;  volume  VI,  Yomah  and  Ilagigah  ;  volume  VII, 
Betzah,  Succah  and  Moed  Katoii ;  volume  VIII,  INIegillali  and 
Ebel  Rabbathi ;  volume  IX,  Aboth,  Al)oth  do  Rabbi  Nathan  and 
Derech  Eretz;  volume  X,  Baba  Kama;  volumes  XI  and  XII, 
Baba  Metzia;  XIII  and  XIV,  Baba  Bathra.  New  York  1896, 
1902. 

p.  93.  Agada.  Of  his  "Agada der  Palastinischen  Amoraer,"  W.Bacher 
published  1896  Volume  II  Die  Schueler  Jochanan's.  and  1899 
vol.  Ill,  Die  letzten  Amoraer  des  hciligen  Landos. 
Archaeological.  P.  Ilieger,  Technologio  u.  Terminologie  der 
Handwerke  in  der  Mischnah.  Berlin,  1805. 
E.  Vogdstein.  Die  Landwirthschaft  in  Palestina  zur  Zeit  der 
Mischna.    Berlin  1894. 


296  Addenda. 

p.  94.  Biographical.  M.  D.  Hoffmann.  Biographie  des  Klischa  ben 
Abuya.     Vienna,  1870. 

F.  Kanter.  Beitraege  zur  Kenntniss  des  Rechtsystemsundder 
Ethik  Mar  Samuels.     Bern,  1895. 

A,  Kisch.      Hillel  der  Alte,  Lebensbild  eines  jued.  Weisen 
Prag  1889. 
L.  Lewin,  R  Simon  b.  Jochai.     Frankf.  o.  M.  1893. 

p.  95.  Customs.  I.  M.  Cassanowicz.  Non-Jewish  religious  ceremon- 
ies in  the  Talmud  (In  proceedings  of  the  American  Oriental 
Society).    New  York,  1894. 

Education.    E.  Van  Gelden.  Die  Volkeschule  des  juedisclieii 
Alterthums  nach  Talmudischen  Quellen.    Berlin  1872. 
J. Lewit.  Darstellung  der  theoretischen  und  practischen  Paeda- 
gogik  im  juedischen  Alterthum.  Berlin,  1896. 
Ethics.    M.  Lazarus     Die  Ethik  des  Judenthums.     Frankf 
o.  M.  1898. 

Translated  into  English  (the  Ethics  of  Judaism)  by  Henriette 
Szold,  2  volumes.    Philadelphia,  1900-1901. 

p.  96.  Exegesis  and  Biblb  Criticism.  W.  Backer.  Ein  Woerterbuch 
der  bibelexegetischen  Kunstsprache  der  Tannaiten.  Leip- 
zig, 1899. 

M.  Eisenstadt.  Ueber  Bibelkritik  in  der  talmud.  Literatur. 
Berlin  1894. 

p.  97.  Law  in  General.  M.  Mielziner.  Legal  Maxims  and  Funda- 
mental Laws  of  the  civil  and  criminal  code  of  the  Talmud. 
Cincinnati,  1898. 

M.  W.  Rapaport.  Der  Talmud  und  sein  Recht  (In  Zeitschrift 
fuer  vergleichende  Rechtswissenschaf t,  XIV  Band.  Stuttgart. 
1900. 

Judicial  Courts.  Adolf  Buechler ,  Das  Synhedrion  in  Jerusa- 
lem.    Vienna,  1902. 

/.  Klein.  Das  Gesetz  ueber  das  gerichtlische  Beweisverfah- 
ren  nach  mosaisch  talmudischem  Rechte.      Halle,  1885. 

p,  98.  Civil  Law.  M.  Block.  Der  Vertrag  nach  mosaisch-talmud. 
Rechte  Budapest,  1892. 

Inheritance  and  Testament.  M.  Block.  Das  mosaisch-tal- 
mud. Erbrecht.   Budapest,  1890. 

M.  Mielziner.  The  Rabbinical  Law  of  Hereditary  Succession. 
Cincinnati,   1900. 

M.  "W.  Rapaport.    Grundsaetze  des  (talmudischen)  Intestat- 
erbrechts  und  Schenkungen(in  Zeitschrift  fuer  vergleichende 
Eechts  wissenschaft  XIV  Band,  pp.  33-148)  Stuttgart,  1900. 
A.Wolff.     Das  JuediBche  Erbrecht.     Berlin,  1888. 


Addenda.  207 

p.  98.  Law  of  Marriage  axd  Divorce.  D.  W.  Amram.  The  Jew- 
ish Law  of  Divorce.    Philadelphia  1896. 

p.  99.  Laws  Concerning  Slavery.  D.  F<irb.stein.  Das  Recht  der 
freieiiund  der  unfreieii  Arbeiter  nach  Juedish-talmudischem 
Recht.     Frank,  o.  M.,  1896. 

LiNGUrsTics,  Sam  Kramer.  Grieschsiche  und  Lateinische 
Lehnwoerter  in  Talmud,  Midrasch  u.  Targum,  2  volumes,  iier- 
lin,  1898-99. 

A.  Lieberman.  Das  Pronomen  und  das  Adverbiuin  des  Eabyl- 
Talmudischen  Dialects.    Berlin,  1895. 

p.  100.  Proverbs,  Maxims.  Henry  Cohen.  Talmudic  Sayings.  Cin- 
cinnati, 1895. 

O.  Tauhenhaus.  Echoes  of  Wisdom  or  Talmudic  Sayings. 
Part  I.     Brooklyn,  1900. 

p.  101.  Popular  Treatises.  Arsem  Darmstetter.  The  Talmud  (trans- 
lated from  the  French  by  Henriette  Szold).  Philadelphia, 
1897. 

H.  Goitein.  Anklaeger  und  Vertheidiger  des  Talmud.  Frankf. 
o.  M.  1897. 

/.  Eschelbacher.  Zwei  Reden  ueber  den  Talmud.  Frankf.  o. 
M.,  1897. 

p.  123.  On  Halachs  1'  Moshe  Mi-Sinai,  see  also  Schorr  in  Hechaluz, 
vol.  IV,  pp.  28-49.  In  the  Mishna  the  term  D'i^n  occurs 
only  three  times,  namely:  Peah,  ii,  6;  Eduyoth,  viii,  7 ;  and 
Yedayim,  iv,  6. 

p.   129.  Add  to  Literature  on  Hermeneutic  Rules  the  following : 

Adolf  Schwarz.  Die  Hermeneutische  A  nalogie  in  der  Talmud- 
ischen  Literatur.    Vienna,  1899. 

Adolf  Schivarz.  Der  Hermeneutische  Syllogiemus  in  der 
Talmudischen  Literatur.     Vienna,  1901. 

p.  140.  Instead  of  the  last  eight  lines  of  this  and  the  first  three  lines 
of  page  141,  read  the  following: 

The  fallacy  of  this  inference  is  obvious.  It  postulates  that 
one  may  enter  marriage  only  with  such  a  woman  in  whose 
place  he  can  marry  her  mother,  hence  when  that  mother  is 
either  a  widow  or  a  divorced  woman.  But  according  to  this 
postulate  the  high  priest  could  not  enter  marriage  at  all, 
since  he  was  forbidden  to  marry  either  a  widow  or  a  divorced 
woman.  Ra])bi  Cninaliel  therefore  answered  tiie  questioner  : 
"Go  thou  and  take  care  of  tiie  high  priest  in  regard  to  whom 
it  is  written,  'Only  a  virgin  from  among  his  people  be  shall 
marry ;'  I  shall  then  take  care  of  all  Israel." 


HOW    TO    ENJOY    THE    ECSTASY    THAT 
ACCOMPANIES  SUCCESSFUL  SPEAKING 

BEFORE  AN  AUDIENCE 


THE  USE  OF  THE  WILL  IN   PIBLIC   SPEAKING. 
By  Nathan  Sheppard. 


TALKS   TO   THE   BTUDKNT8    OP    THE    UNIVERSITY    OF    ST. 
ANDREWS   AND   THE  UNIVERSITY   OP   ABERDEEN. 


This  is  Not  a  Book  on  Elocution,  but  it 
Deals  iu  a  Practical  Common-Sense  Way 
with  the  Requirements  and  Constituents 
of  Effective  Public  Speaking.     .-.      .'.      .'. 


CAPITAL,  FAMILIAR,  AND  RACY. 

"I  shall  rccomnuMid  it  to  our  three  schools  of  elocu- 
tion. It  is  capital,  f;unili;ir,  racy,  ami  profoundly 
philosophical." — Joseph  T.  Duryea,  D.D. 

REPLETE  WITH  PRACTICAL  SENSE. 

"It  is  replete  v.- ith  practical  sense  and  sound  sugges- 
tions, and  I  should  like  to  have  it  talked  into  the  stu- 
dents by  the  author.'"— Prof.  J.  H.  Qilmore,  Roches- 
ter University. 

"KNOCKS  TO  FLINDERS"  OLD  THEORIES. 

"  The  author  Icnocks  to  fliiidors  the  theories  of  elocu- 
tionists, and  opposed  all  their  rules  with  one  simple 
counsel:  'Wake  up  your  will.' "— The  New  York 
Evangelist. 

TO  REACH,  MOVE,  ANt)  INFLUENCE  MEN. 

"  lie  dees  not  teach  elocution,  but  the  art  of  public 
epeakiiifr.  .  .  .  Gives  suci^'estions  that  will  enable  one  to 
reach  and  move  and  influence  men." — The  Pittsburg 
Chronicle. 


Cloth,  lamo,  152  Pages.     Price  75  Centi. 


FUNK     &    WAGNALLS     COMPANY, 

30  Lafayette  Place,  New  York. 


Rev.  T.  De  Witt  Talmage,  D.D.:  "I  heartily  com- 
mend his  boolc.    He  has  rendered  invaluable  service." 

(  OP  THE  VOICE 

PBRFBCTION)        gesture 

i  BEARING 

THE  DRILUBOOK  Or 
VOCAL  CILTURE 

By    Prof.    EDWARD    P.    THWING. 

A  Comprehensive  Study  of  the  Fun- 
damental Constituents  of  Effective, 
Graceful  Speaking.  Heartily  Com- 
mended by  the  Highest  Authorities. 


OUTLINE   OF  CONTENTS. 

What  Elocution  ReaUy  Is — Outline  of  Prepara- 
tory Physical  Training  by  Respiratory  Exercises 
and  Gynmastics— The  Production  of  Tone— Cul- 
tivating the  Articulation  Along  the  Lines  of 
Pitch,  Melody,  and  Force — Rate  of  Movement 
—  Personation  or  Picturing  —  Gesture  and  Ex- 
temporaneous  Speech  —  Facial   Expression. 


Prof.  J.  W.  Churchill,  Andover  :  "It  is  an  invalu- 
able treatise." 

The  Independent.  New  York :  "  Compact  and  inex- 
pensive, but  it  omits  nothing  essential." 


t6mo,  in  pp..  Illustrated,  Pap»r  Covert, 
25  cents,     Post'free, 


rUNK  &  WAGNALLS  COMPANY,   Pubrishers, 
30  Lafayette  Place,  New  York. 


FORCEFUL   SPEAKING   BY    NEW   METHODS. 


THE  ESSENTIALS  \  «ev.sed 
OF  ELOCUTION^!  NEW  MAnER 

By  ALFRED  AYRES, 

Author  of  "  The  Orthoepist;'  "  The  Verbalist,''  etc.,  etc. 

An  Old  Subject  from  New  Standpoints. 

A  unique  and  valuable  guide  on  the  art 
of  speaking  the  language  so  as  to  make 
the  thought  it  expresses  clear  and  im- 
pressive. It  is  a  departure  from  the  old 
and  conventional  methods  which  have 
tended  so  often  to  make  mere  automa- 
tons on  the  platform  or  stage  instead  of 
animated  souls. 


HIGHLY  PRAISED  BY  AITHORITIES. 

The  Lutheran  Observer  says:  "It  ia  worth  more 
than  all  the  ponderous  philosophies  on  the  subject.'" 

The  Rochester  Herald  eays:  "It  is  a  case  where 
brevity  is  the  soul  of  value." 

The  Congregationalist  says:  "  His  snggestlons  are 
tlniple  and  sensible. " 

Dramatic  Review  says:  "An  unpretentious  but 
really  meritorious  volume.'" 

The  Dramatic  News  says:  "Mr.  Ayres  has  made 
this  subject  a  study  for  many  years,  and  what  he  has 
written  is  worth  reading." 

Richard  Henry  Stoddard  says:  "It  is  brightly 
written  and  original." 


WITH   n«.OI*{XISI»lECE. 

Tasteful  ClotU   Binding.      TUchle  Edges. 
Images.    16nio.    rrice,  75  cents. 


174 


FUNK  &  WAGNALLS  CO.,  Publishers, 

30   Lafayette    Place,  New  York. 


Do  You  Write  English  Correctly? 

CONSUI^X 

English  Compound 

Words  and  Phrases, 


"  This  book  may  be  considered  a  final  authority."— 
School  Bulletin  and  New  York  State  Educational 
Journal,  Syracuse.      

"  English  Compound  Words  and  Phrases  "  con- 
tains a  Reference  List  of  about  40,000  Terms,  with 
Statement  of  Principles  and  Rules.  By  F.  Horace 
Teall,  Author  of  '*  The  Compounding  of  English 
Words,  "  and  Department  Editor  of  Funk  &  Wag- 
nails'  "Standard  Dictionary."  8vo,  cloth,  leather 
back,  311  pp.    Price,  $2.50;  post-free. 


Professor  W.  C.  Wilkinson,  University  of 
Chicago:  "  It  inspires  confidence.  ...  It  cannot  fail 
to  be  of  great  service."  Paper  and  Press,  Phila- 
delphia: "  The  book  is  of  essential  importance  to 
writers,  and  to  proof-readers,  printers,  etc.,  it  will  be 
a  boon."  Edward.  M.  Paxson,  Chief  Justice 
Supreme  Court  of  Pennsylvania:  "We  needed  an  au- 
thority upon  this  subject,  and  this  want  Mr.  TealPs  1^ 
book  has  fully  supplied.  .  .  .  Will  be  of  great  use." 
Prof.  Moses  Coit  Ti/fer,  Cornell  University:  "I 
must  assent  to  his  [Mr.  TealPs]  conclusions."  Inter 
Ocean,  Chicago:  "A  valuable  book  for  the  reference 
library,  for  proof-readers,  and  all  who  wish  to  write 
clearly  and  elegantly."  Henry  S.  Moore,  proof- 
reader The  Outlook  (formerly  The  Christian  Uni07i), 
New  York:  "Mr.  Teall  has  brought  order  and  con- 
sistency out  of  a  chaos  of  inconsistency  and  unreason." 
Horatio  Alger,  tTr.:  "It  will  be  appreciated  and 
valued  by  all  literary  men  and  scholars.  ...  To  be 
considered  not  only  as  an  authority,  but  as  the  author- 
ity on  this  subject." 


FUNK  &  WAGNALLS  COMPANY,  Publishers, 
30  Lafayette  Place,  New  York. 


NEW  WORD  POSSIBILITIES  DISCLOSED 

*^  There  is  no  book  yet  offered  u'hich  is  ifs  equal 
in  imparting  a  masttry  of  tvords.''''  —  Pren. 
Cochran,   Brooklyn   Polytechnic   IiiHtitule. 

ENGLISH  SYNONYMS, 

ANTONYMS, 

AND  PREPOSITIONS. 

By  JAMES  C.  FERNALD, 

Editor  students^  Standard  Dictionary;  Editor  Syno- 

nymSy  Antonyins,  and  Prepof<itio7is  in  the 

Standard  Dictionary. 


More  than  7,500  Classified  and  Discrim- 
inated Synonyms.  Nearly  4,000  Class- 
ified Antonj'ms.  Correct  Use  of  Prepo- 
sitions Clearly  Shown  by  Illustrative 
Examples.  Hints  and  Helps  on  the 
Accurate  Use  of  "Words. 

INDISPENSABLE  TO  STIDENTS  AND   WRITERS. 

A  Guide  to  New  Word  Treasures. 

Pre*.  Cocliran,  Brooklyn  Polytochnic  Inetitute  : 
"This  book  will  do  more  to  secure  rhetorical  perepi- 
cuity,  propriety,  and  precision  of  expression  than  any 
otfier  text-hook  of  higher  English  yet  produced.''^ 

First  Satisfactory  Attempt. 

The  Brooklyn  <"itizeii:  "It  is,  indeed,  the 
first  satisfactory  attempt  in  its  field.'" 

Superior  to  all  Other  Works. 

Northern  Chrlntlan  Advooair:  -Sni'tMior 
to  any  other  treatise  on  the  same  tlieiiu'.  and  imibt  he 
regarded  as  indispensable  tothercady-refereucc  libraries 
of  educators  and  writers." 


12mo,    574    pp.,    Heavy    Cloth    Iii,iding, 
rricc,  $1.50,  net. 


FUNK    &    WAGNALLS    CO..    Publishers,    NEW    YORK. 


'' A  BOOK  WHICH  HATH  BEEN  CULLED 
FROM  THE  FLOWERS  OF  ALL  BOOKS/' 

"  The  wisdom  of  the  wise  and  the  experience 
of  ages  may  be  preserved  in  a  quotation.'''' 

New  Cyclopedia  of 
Practical  Quotations* 

OF  GREAT  VALUE. 
Ex-Presid€nt  Benjamin  Harrison  :  "  I  can  see  that 
'  The  New  Cyclopedia  of  Practical  Quotations '  would 
have  great  value  and  usefulness  to  many  persons." 

ACCURATE  AND  COMPLETE. 
President  Francis  L.  Patton,  Princeton  University: 
"It  has  been  prepared  with  very  great  care,  and  it  is 
very  complete." 

RARE  AID  TO  SCHOLARS. 
Judge  Albert  Haight  (Court  of  Appeals,  State  of 
New  York):  "  As  an  aid  to  the  scholar  and  as  a  book  of 
reference  it  is  of  rare  value." 

ONLY  STANDARD  WORK. 
Boston    Post :    "  It  is  the  only  standard  book  of 
quotations." 

BEST  IN  EXISTENCE. 
New  York  Herald  :  "  By  long  odds  the  best  book  of 
quotations  in  existence." 

INVALUABLE  TO  WRITERS. 
Wiiliam  Hayes  Ward,   D.D.,   Editor  "The  Inde- 
pendent." N.  Y.:   "Invaluable  to  the  writer  who  has 
constantly  to  verify  quotations  that  occur  to  him." 

CAREFULLY  COMPILED. 
William  Cleaver  Wilkinson,  D.D.,  University  of 
Chicago:  "  It  is  a  monument  of  conscientious,  intelligent 
industry.    The  indexes  make  it  very  convenient  for  use." 

MOST  SATISFACTORY  WORK. 
W.  J.  Rolfe,  M.A.,  D.L.  (the  Shakespearian  Critic, 
Harvard  University):   "By  far  the  most  complete  and 
satisfactory  work  of  its  class  in  the  market." 


FUNK  &  WAGNALLS  CO.,  Publishers, 
30  Lafayette  Place.  New  York. 


DATE  DUE 

,uai ryi^ 

«^ 

'liMiiiiiriin 

i* 

APR  I27"f 

M^y   5-^ 

m ' "'^ 

MF 

STIffT^ 

"^       l«JV  f 

ii^il""'*^ 

h- 

,mmem0^ 

^' 

-^SSK 

1- 

GAYUORD 

PRINTEOINU.S.A. 

alii 


'X0S 


